Help with Pool Experiment / Part 2

Too long to watch...I watched the first game. Tough to 'grade' the players...neither one is an A player. As far as your theory, imo you're correct. Any letter grade or numerical assignment is subjective at best. Different areas of the country reflect different ability players...sometimes even within the same region. I would say no, you can't judge someone's skill by watching a "brief sample". I would want to see 10-20 games to make somewhat of an accurate assessment. jmo

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

David Marcus said:

Once again I need your assistance....part 2

I would like to test a theory with the help of my fellow AZers. My theory is based on the premise that ranking a player as an A,B or C is at the very best subjective depending on where your own playing level is and just as importantly how you "perceive" your own playing level to be.
I would also submit that depending on where in the country or in the world that you play weighs in to your "regional ranking" system. Is an A player in Chicago the same as an A player in the South or vice versa?
Thirdly the question is whether you can accurately judge a players level simply by watching a brief sample of them playing or practicing?
I'll be very curious to hear what each of you think. Please watch the video below and post on this thread the level of player/players you think you are watching. Please try to stick to straight whole letter grades for the sake of this exercise.
Thanks in advance for your assistance in this experiment.

http://youtu.be/ZW9OhkbsoqI

Click to expand...

Skill Ranking

I only watched the first two games but I would say the older gentleman would be an SL 6 and the kid a 5 in our league. Both shoot too hard and loose the cue ball. The kid had two different ball in hands that he did nothing with.

Only watched the first game. I call the kid a C- and the older gent a B to B-. But I am really bad at judging talent so take it for what it is worth.

I would rate Matt an APA 4 and Dave a 5. Dave decent strait shot.

oh man you guys are just too generous. i watched the entire match since i am off work today.

in my area the young guy would be an apa 3 and the older guy a good apa 4 or at best a low 5. as scott said its hard to judge in a short race but i saw tooooo many misses, wrong shot selections and poor safety attempts .

maybe there is something about the thought that a handicap in one area would be different in another area. i thought the guy was just bs'ing me when i was in vegas for the apa team nationals. we played a team from ohio or indiana ..cant remember which . he said he was an apa captain for 19 years and i was the best 5 he had ever seen. he said there were some 7's in his league who could not play at my level.

believe me ...i am not the best 5 in my area its hard to believe i could be the best 5 an apa captain has seen in 19 years. i did happen to beat his 5 38-10 after beating another 5 in my 1st match 38-4. i just thought both my opponents were weak 5's at best.

David Marcus said:

Once again I need your assistance....part 2

I would like to test a theory with the help of my fellow AZers. My theory is based on the premise that ranking a player as an A,B or C is at the very best subjective depending on where your own playing level is and just as importantly how you "perceive" your own playing level to be.
I would also submit that depending on where in the country or in the world that you play weighs in to your "regional ranking" system. Is an A player in Chicago the same as an A player in the South or vice versa?
Thirdly the question is whether you can accurately judge a players level simply by watching a brief sample of them playing or practicing?
I'll be very curious to hear what each of you think. Please watch the video below and post on this thread the level of player/players you think you are watching. Please try to stick to straight whole letter grades for the sake of this exercise.
Thanks in advance for your assistance in this experiment.

http://youtu.be/ZW9OhkbsoqI

Click to expand...

You've got nothing to gain from this exercise. You're right and you're wrong. First, when grading someone's handicap, it's never "accurate". It's always a guess. The reason it's done is to put someone in the right category for finer indexing later. When you say, "That guy is probably a B", you're saying he's no beginner and he's no pro. But if you honestly think he's a B, the only way to see if you're right is if he matches-up several times with other Bs.

That's not to mention that ratings are never accurate. There are more accurate ones and less accurate ones but nothing is absolute. They're all vague interpretations of how someone plays. Matches are always decided on tables, not on paper.

Have I ever been fooled by watching someone for a brief time? Absolutely. I'll sometimes find myself in a match with someone that doesn't look terribly impressive only to realize he's A+ speed and I've seen guys that looked like killers only to realize they're Cs. How much you let your stroke out and how well you pocket can lead to varying interpretations of your ability. In the end, rack the balls and put up the cash is the best way to see.

With that said, at least 95% of the time, I can size-up whether or not I can beat a guy within minutes. I can usually size-up whether or not my buddy who doesn't play as well as me can beat him too. So yeah, most of the time, I can rate someone pretty close but I'm never surprised if I get fooled.

lorider said:

oh man you guys are just too generous. i watched the entire match since i am off work today.

in my area the young guy would be an apa 3 and the older guy a good apa 4 or at best a low 5. as scott said its hard to judge in a short race but i saw tooooo many misses, wrong shot selections and poor safety attempts .

maybe there is something about the thought that a handicap in one area would be different in another area. i thought the guy was just bs'ing me when i was in vegas for the apa team nationals. we played a team from ohio or indiana ..cant remember which . he said he was an apa captain for 19 years and i was the best 5 he had ever seen. he said there were some 7's in his league who could not play at my level.

believe me ...i am not the best 5 in my area its hard to believe i could be the best 5 an apa captain has seen in 19 years. i did happen to beat his 5 38-10 after beating another 5 in my 1st match 38-4. i just thought both my opponents were weak 5's at best.

Click to expand...

If these were bar boxes, I would easily place them as 3 and 4. But, you put your average 4 and 5 on a 9 footer and they are going to look like 3 and 4.

Ya i thought they were 8ft but I could be mistaken. Both players have some big holes in their strategy game. I'll call the young guy p1 and the man with the hat p2. Rack 1 showed a weak break by P1. P2 showed some good shooting skills this rack but it was his attempt to break out the 4 that was bad. seemed to me that P2 had good angle to go at it on his second shot but chose to pocket balls instead. he shoulda tried to break it out on his second shot. take the six and run into the cluster in space. P1 also showed weakness by not playing a good safe or breakout with ball in hand this game. Me personally I would have played to break out the cluster that was on the bottom rail and plan a good out. make P2 kick at it or stick him good under a ball.
Thats the whole thing with this game. You need to setup the win. These players really didn't make the setup look good. There were lots of times during the matches where the wrong shots were played. I can sit here and explain but the main principle is. Dont go for the out until its there!!!!!!! Ask yourself how many times you break and run. Then ask yourself how many times you try to break and run. If you never break and run and try to break in run each game, something is wrong. both players need to work the setup as their shooting level is at an apa 4/5. Aside from working on your stroke and fundamentals you can also watch strategy. I recommend watching the barbox videos on insidepoolmag's channel and theactionreport channel. Theres a lot of thinking that both players need to do. They both need to "learn the moves" or right shots. Think 2balls before the 8 and dont go for the out until you have it. Really I agree with the 4 and 5 ratings in apa. P1 is the 4 and P2 is the 5. The biggest out was like a 3 ball out which isn't that good considering yall played 5 games. Keep working and practicing hope this helps.

Dave ... The individual rankings that people have locally usually doesn't match up with how they would be ranked considering a much larger area. For example, we usually add a rank for any players coming out of Tulsa.

I don't rank players according to A,B,C, A+, A++, etc.

I rank (and clock) players by a 1 to 15 money rating scale (used to be 1 to 10 a long time ago, but have had to expand it) Efren is a 15 for example. Several pros I would rate usually from 12-14. By using this system, I can account for true 8's,9's.10's as they would be on a national level as well as a local level. I further expand this like if 2 10,s are playing, I might rate one a 10.2, and the other a 10.7, so if I am betting on the match, I would go with the 10.7 player. When you are clocking someone, you have to consider all the little things like how well they bank, 1 rail, 2, 3, and 4 rail banks (4 rails is usually sufficient enough because I haven't seen anyone 5 rail bank in 8 or 9 ball, maybe in Golf on a Snooker table). How well they kick, How well they jump, how well they safety, how well they break, how well they think, how tough they are mentally, and of course how well they run tables. All this is evaluated after you check their mechanics, and stroke. You also have to consider how they play on different table sizes.

This is how I have done it for years, and I have been playing and betting for 52 years.

So tough to watch. I'm in MA. I would say D players. If they argued with me I would let them be C.
Paul D.

Because we're sticking to whole letter grades, it's pretty easy to make a judgment
just on the first game. Do you consider 1 hour a 'brief sample'?
One game I think qualifies as a brief sample. One hour is probably overkill.

Older guy: B player.

Why he's definitely not a C or lower:

• cutting the 14 into the rail on his straight-in 14-5 combo, so he can move the cue ball uptable.
• seemed like he went for a breakout and played to hit the left side of the cluster intentionally,
to ensure he wouldn't get hooked on his 7 ball. The cue ball checked sharply so it wasn't
natural for that to happen, I think he had to do force follow or inside to make it happen.
• Made pretty tough backcut on that 7 and went into the cluster.
• That 8 ball was not easy, I think a C player murders this shot.

Why I suspect he's not an A player (though I'm not an A myself):

• Needed 3 innings to get out of a rack of 8 ball.
• Waited way too late to solve that cluster with the 4 ball.
• While being comfortable with the 2-railer and coming semi-close with it, indicates he can play...
I think an A-player crosses that ball one rail, or makes it follow in his opponent's hanger,
or combos the hanger and freezes the CB to the head rail. An A player doesn't just
take a flyer and sell out.
• Played "cinch shape" on his last ball before the 8, an A player wouldn't settle here.


Younger guy: C player.

Why he's definitely not a D or lower:

• Seems to have solid fundamentals and strokes with confidence. Draws the cue ball easily at will.
• Plays the correct shot to break out his problem ball, though he hit it really bad.
• Seems to use intentional sidespin on a few shots.
• Even with a missed ball-in-hand, got the first stab at the 8 ball vs. the B player

Why he's definitely not a B or higher:

• Missed ball in hand and set up wrong draw angle for easy breakout.
• Missed hanging ball combo
• Played the draw shot on his side pocket shot and murdered position.
• Could easily have hooked the other guy when he played safe (making his 14), but let him see the whole ball.
• Doesn't seem to care or play serious enough to be a B player.

I like these types of tests, and it's a shame they''ve not got more views. Very interesting to people living in countries where there are few players to benchmark against and/or no real ratings system.

And, as ever, I see things completely differently to most around here.

Old guy is a good player, no doubt about it. Probably hasn't the biggest stroke in the world but most certainly knows what he's trying to achieve, and I'll bet he's annoyingly difficult to beat. He knows the value of throw/serve and when to use them. He knows the connection between the CB and OB. He has timing and subtlety. He's playing well within himself for the purposes of this exercise, I'd say.

The young lad is plain hopeless. Old guy is giving him rope to hang himself with.

People completely over-estimate their abilities, which is one of the aims of this test. They are in denial about it. They remember the few times when they ran out like water and completely gloss-over their usual standard of play.

Pool is hard. Few are good at it.

This is actually my home room and the table I play on most Saturdays. It is a small world to see this on the internet. With that said I don't really know either of these gentleman but I could reasonably rank them for this area.

I am an "A" player and I know all the top local players,so I feel that I am a very good judge of a players speed. I would put the younger kid at a "C" and the older man in my opinion would be a "B-", but this is only based on the two games I watched.

The best players seem to have an air about them and look solid on the table...very balanced You wouldn't be able to push them over easily if you shoved them while they were down on their stroke, even their bridge hands look tight and not shaky. The first thing I notice with most "C" players is that they don't look steady, their foundation isn't strong, the mechanics are not there.

Ron Swanson said:

I like these types of tests, and it's a shame they''ve not got more views. Very interesting to people living in countries where there are few players to benchmark against and/or no real ratings system.

And, as ever, I see things completely differently to most around here.

Old guy is a good player, no doubt about it. Probably hasn't the biggest stroke in the world but most certainly knows what he's trying to achieve, and I'll bet he's annoyingly difficult to beat. He knows the value of throw/serve and when to use them. He knows the connection between the CB and OB. He has timing and subtlety. He's playing well within himself for the purposes of this exercise, I'd say.

The young lad is plain hopeless. Old guy is giving him rope to hang himself with.

People completely over-estimate their abilities, which is one of the aims of this test. They are in denial about it. They remember the few times when they ran out like water and completely gloss-over their usual standard of play.

Pool is hard. Few are good at it.

Click to expand...

Some are judging by the first game. It was the highpoint of the match. The young guy won. I had to edit my comment from the first game after watching the entire match.

David Marcus said:

So far the analysis has been extremely interesting and somewhat enlightening. Thanks to all who have shared their observations, it is much appreciated.

Click to expand...

i think its kinda hard to judge your true speed from hitting a few racks in practice and just one match where you lost to what seemed to me a lower level player than you are.it seemed pretty obvious you know your way around the table.

it seems you are a pretty good shot maker. just based on what i saw what keeps you from being a b player is cue ball control. too many times you got outa position and made it harder on your self than you should have. in my opinion lack of cue ball control and failure to play safe when you should have cost you that match against what seems to be every bodys opinion on here including mine a lower level opponent .

i am not gonna say whether you think like an a player or even a b as far as that goes because i honestly don't know what you are thinking when you make a shot. i will say you do not have the cue ball control of a higher level player.... again just based on what i saw.

David Marcus said:

So far the analysis has been extremely interesting and somewhat enlightening. Thanks to all who have shared their observations, it is much appreciated.

Click to expand...

i am interested in knowing what your actual tap handicap is ...if you dont mind saying. :grin:

i am an apa 5 and again just based on what i saw i think we are equal in shot making ability but i have the edge in cue ball control , pattern selection and defensive capability.

i used to try and run out all the time before finally listening to a teamate. he told me if you cannot run out play safe. since then i kinda adopted my own motto. if i cant make it ...don;t leave it.

now i sometimes run up 30 innings before i win playing against my opponents. nothing like leaving a 7 hard and watching him scratch on the 8 .:grin:

I only just now got a chance to watch this, and decide on my comments.

I think these are good exercises, especially for less experienced folks like me. It makes me watch to see what I would do. Watching the pro's is better to learn by, but much of the time you don't know how the pro is hitting each individual shot, so it is difficult to really learn the specifics of how to get from point a to point b. Doing this every now and again is a good reflective exercise. Thanks for doing them, David, and good on you for letting yourself be a test subject.

I don't have much experience beyond my little middle of nowhere APA league, so judging letter grades is difficult for me. I've been trying to get a gauge on how to compare our Skill Levels to the A, B, C grading for a while now. I realize it is subjective, and that it varies depending on where you are, both the APA Skill Levels and the A, B, C's. All I can go with is my estimation of Skill Level. I appreciate those who are in a position to know better, and can give both examples and comparisons, it is helpful.

All that having been said, I would say that the younger player (Matt, I presume) would be a strong SL3 here. Unless he played primarily other SL3's, in which case he would get raised to SL4, and get beaten a lot. (Unless he went back to playing SL3's again.) He hits it HARD, often And likes that draw... Pulls his cue up in the air on the follow through (guilty of that over here sometimes, frustrates me).

The older of the two (David, I presume) would probably be an SL5 here, middle of the pack among our SL5's.

Again, thanks for doing these. I appreciate it. And look forward to more commentary.

justadub said:

I only just now got a chance to watch this, and decide on my comments.

I think these are good exercises, especially for less experienced folks like me. It makes me watch to see what I would do. Watching the pro's is better to learn by, but much of the time you don't know how the pro is hitting each individual shot, so it is difficult to really learn the specifics of how to get from point a to point b. Doing this every now and again is a good reflective exercise. Thanks for doing them, David, and good on you for letting yourself be a test subject.

I don't have much experience beyond my little middle of nowhere APA league, so judging letter grades is difficult for me. I've been trying to get a gauge on how to compare our Skill Levels to the A, B, C grading for a while now. I realize it is subjective, and that it varies depending on where you are, both the APA Skill Levels and the A, B, C's. All I can go with is my estimation of Skill Level. I appreciate those who are in a position to know better, and can give both examples and comparisons, it is helpful.

All that having been said, I would say that the younger player (Matt, I presume) would be a strong SL3 here. Unless he played primarily other SL3's, in which case he would get raised to SL4, and get beaten a lot. (Unless he went back to playing SL3's again.) He hits it HARD, often And likes that draw... Pulls his cue up in the air on the follow through (guilty of that over here sometimes, frustrates me).

The older of the two (David, I presume) would probably be an SL5 here, middle of the pack among our SL5's.

Again, thanks for doing these. I appreciate it. And look forward to more commentary.

Click to expand...

i kinda like these videos by regular league players. it lets me know how i compare.

once i get the technical know how and the equipment i might just put up a video and show ya'll how much i suck at this game lol.