Bob, I didn't want to hijack your other thread, so I figured I'd start a new one.
You mentioned that there are other problems that crop up when certain innings are excluded. Since there are really no two way shots in straight pool, I'm trying to think of what you meant by this. Can you clarify?
To those of you who haven't seen the other thread, I am on a campaign to change the Balls-Per-Inning stat . As it's presently calculated, innings consisting entirely of a safety are counted in the formula, bringing the overall number down heavily. To provide a quick example, someone who runs three 50s, but gets bogged down with a tight opponent during the safety battles, can easily have a BPI around 7. To delve further, take two players who ran the same 3 50s - one who did it in consecutive innings and another who was forced to engage in lengthy safe battles - they will have wildly different BPI calcs. I'm not sure what value, if any, this provides.
If discounting the safes made it such that official scorekeepers were necessary, I'd understand the difficulties. But you need scorekeepers to calculate a BPI as it is - and if you don't trust them enough to recognize a safe, you shouldn't be trusting them with your score.
OK, there it is. Who agrees and who doesn't?
- Steve
You mentioned that there are other problems that crop up when certain innings are excluded. Since there are really no two way shots in straight pool, I'm trying to think of what you meant by this. Can you clarify?
To those of you who haven't seen the other thread, I am on a campaign to change the Balls-Per-Inning stat . As it's presently calculated, innings consisting entirely of a safety are counted in the formula, bringing the overall number down heavily. To provide a quick example, someone who runs three 50s, but gets bogged down with a tight opponent during the safety battles, can easily have a BPI around 7. To delve further, take two players who ran the same 3 50s - one who did it in consecutive innings and another who was forced to engage in lengthy safe battles - they will have wildly different BPI calcs. I'm not sure what value, if any, this provides.
If discounting the safes made it such that official scorekeepers were necessary, I'd understand the difficulties. But you need scorekeepers to calculate a BPI as it is - and if you don't trust them enough to recognize a safe, you shouldn't be trusting them with your score.
OK, there it is. Who agrees and who doesn't?
- Steve