8 ball improved handicap suggestions

[pete lafond]

In several other topics, handicapping and sandbagging seem to be a point of some interests. There are many leagues and lots of players. Please excuse me if this post replicates one that existed previously.

In your post here, please indicate your recommendations for an 8 ball league handicapping system. Just as if you were operating the league. Also, if you agree with a current handicapping system, then specify how that league determines player handicaps and what you like about it.

If this post is successful, I will create a survey topic of the results gathered here for those interested in polling. If this post is really successful, another post concerning 8 ball rules and how to minimize sandbagging. (later we can add 9 ball, 14.1 and carom billiards)

Please keep reasonably brief.

 

[FLICKit]

In several other topics, handicapping and sandbagging seem to be a point of some interests. There are many leagues and lots of players. Please excuse me if this post replicates one that existed previously.

In your post here, please indicate your recommendations for an 8 ball league handicapping system. Just as if you were operating the league. Also, if you agree with a current handicapping system, then specify how that league determines player handicaps and what you like about it.

If this post is successful, I will create a survey topic of the results gathered here for those interested in polling. If this post is really successful, another post concerning 8 ball rules and how to minimize sandbagging. (later we can add 9 ball, 14.1 and carom billiards)

Please keep reasonably brief.

Good post.

Of course some people will try to degenerate this thread, as is there typical Modus Operandi, so we will just have to ignore them.

The Accu-Stats rating system seems like an interesting starting system. It's drawbacks are it's difficulty in scoring for a new player, but familiarity and experience could mitigate that over time. Those stats could be used to establish an average rating for a player. Would have to also take into account their highest rating as well. Then at any major tournament, any player that exceeds their highest rating by too large a margin, would automatically be eliminated. A few people might get caught in that web, by having the game of their life, and thus getting disqualified, but anyone too far above their rating would be deviant to any system.

 

[chefjeff]

In several other topics, handicapping and sandbagging seem to be a point of some interests. There are many leagues and lots of players. Please excuse me if this post replicates one that existed previously.

In your post here, please indicate your recommendations for an 8 ball league handicapping system. Just as if you were operating the league. Also, if you agree with a current handicapping system, then specify how that league determines player handicaps and what you like about it.

If this post is successful, I will create a survey topic of the results gathered here for those interested in polling. If this post is really successful, another post concerning 8 ball rules and how to minimize sandbagging. (later we can add 9 ball, 14.1 and carom billiards)

Please keep reasonably brief.

I base this on having played leagues since the 70's...

The VNEA and BCA are good, but not perfect. I'd keep them as is, except I'd make it so a player could not establish a handicap until he had played at least two weeks of league. This makes sandbagging in the first few weeks verrrrrry costly later on. We had an old league in the late 80's (the LO's blew all the cash at the new casino in town ) that used this method and no one sandbagged ever. I mean never sandbagged, because it didn't work.

It also helps if the LO's give out the appropriate awards, pins, patches, etc. for high average, 8-ball runouts, consecutive wins, etc. so there's additional incentives to play one's best.

Jeff Livingston

 

[DAN D]

The Best System I've Seen Is To Use A Ball Average, And Score The Match By Total Balls Made.with The Handicap Included.also Do Not Have Playoffs.this Eliminates Sandbagging.i've Played Apa,vnea,bud Light,etc.,this Seems The Fairest One To Me.

 

[FLICKit]

Improved Rating System

This thread might be better served to be titled "improved rating system". The word "handicapping" has some negative connotations and stereotypes as a result of pool's history. With an accurate rating system, then adjustments can be made for handicapping if desired (always including as one potential option - no handicapping).


Could also be interesting to have a ranking system whereby the better players would have a higher ranking. This could be encouraged by having tournaments that seed players based on their ranking (i.e. 1v64 2v63 3v62... similar to tennis). This would encourage players to improve their ranking, so as to improve their chances in the tournament.

Tournaments could be provided for players within certain ranking ranges. For example, suppose there are 5,000 pool players in an area. Could have a tournament just for the top 500 players alotted to the first 64 to sign up. In other words, you can sign up for a tournament only if you're a top 500 player, and 63 or less other players have signed up already. Then you could do another tournament that allows for players ranked 400-1000. Note: overlapping the ranges (i.e. starting at 400 instead of 500) could be useful for helping players rise up and down from range to range. Could have another tournament for players ranked 900 and below (900-5000).

This would have the advantage of allowing all matches to be a race to X games, thus no handicap. At the same time, lower ranked players would be able to play against equal caliber players. You have to win straight up.

Now the issue would be, determining the system to use to determine player rankings. Finishing below your ranking, could/would move you down at a slow rate. Finishing above your ranking would move you up. Obviously winning a tournament would have to progess your ranking up more spots.


Another thing that could be helpful is to unify some of the tournaments, by slightly reducing the payouts of the local tournaments. But the winners or top X placers would qualify for a quarterly tournament where the big money (via monies collected from the smaller tournaments) would be available. This larger tournament would be watched closely so as to adjust rankings up or down appropriate to player abilities.

Thus, if you want to try to manipulate your rating downward, then you would be only getting the smaller money. If you wanted to try to win the larger money, then you'd have to play strong in the big tournament where you'd be watched closely.


Now, if we can just keep the riff raff out of the thread, who's first inclination is bash first and ponder solutions later/never. It's always easier to try to tear down a suggestion from someone else, than to build up and provide positive solutions on your own.

This may not be a perfect solution, would be willing to hear other ideas, suggestions, or even better solutions in a different direction.

 

[Teacherman]

A national handicap system is simply not realistic. The one league that claims to have a system that works would handicap watchez, me, oldhasbeen, cory duel, johnny archer, gabe owen etc etc etc all the same.

There is at least a 5 or 6 ball difference between me and the pros. OldHasBeen could spot me the 7. I can spot watchez the 8.

Yet, in that system we would all rank as 7's.

The problem with a handicap system based on scores, is the quality of the opponent. There is little or no consideration that my scores were against weak or strong opponents. Or wether the opponent was trying. And you say, well over time that evens out. Well, it won't even out in a league session. Maybe over several sessions. By then, the players are disgusted with the system.

And if it starts to even out in your Tuesday night division, it doesnt mean it has in the Wednesday night division. Or if it has in the Wednesday night division, it doesn't mean that a 7 on Tuesday night is the same as a 7 on Wednesday. And it won't, until they play the same people several times. And they won't play the same people because they play on different nights.

Finally, they play each other in the playoffs and the Tuesday night 7 is really a 5 because the quality of play on his night was easier than the quality of play on Wednesday night.

Now, take that times 7 for 7 nights per week and then times the number of venues across the country and you have the odds of a 7 in New York equalling a 7 in L.A.

Add to that the "bar room" player attitude that it is better to be handicapped wrong than to play good, which means many of his scores aren't accurate no matter who he played and you have the status of current national handicapping.

Handicapping can be done locally with a good degree of accuracy if the league operator observes the players. Which means, it has possibilities in inhouse leagues. By the time a 15 week session is played the operator has scores, and his observations to help him make the necessary adjustments.

A lot of work, but it can work.

I recommend local handicapping to give beginners a boost as they enter the world of competitive pool. A necessary evil if you will. Why would they play if they had no chance? So, give them a boost.

Then, take the Allstars from your league (those you deem can compete on a national level; or probably the best players you have) and send them to national tournaments where everything is played scratch.

Have a local playoff amongst the teams, including handicaps, so the beginners and intermediates have a meaningful event to play for and learn from.

 

[DAN D]

Good posts teach,I shot is teach's league for about 5 years and his local handicapping,by a league operator was pretty accurate,as long as the league operator did not get lazy.I still like the 4 man or 5 man leagues that use a straight up ball count as a score and handicap.You play everyone once per night and your ball average is your handicap.You can score by rounds won or,just total points at the end of the night with hcp's added in.You eliminate any sandbagging by not having any playoffs.Put all the money on the line in the regular season.

 

[FLICKit]

A national handicap system is simply not realistic. The one league that claims to have a system that works would handicap watchez, me, oldhasbeen, cory duel, johnny archer, gabe owen etc etc etc all the same.

Such a f**king idiot. Nobody was even talkin about that sh*t. But of course, you're a f**king broken record as has already been proven. So f**king clueless as usual. Your riff raff post is exactly what we've been referring to in its total stupidity. You can see nothin cuz you have stupidity blinders on, as usual.

...And you say, well over time that evens out...

With your pure stupidity you once again try to put words into other people's mouth, wrongly. WRONG WRONG WRONG... once again. Typical for you. As your negative reputation has already shown itself.

Handicapping can be done locally with a good degree of accuracy if the league operator observes the players. Which means, it has possibilities in inhouse leagues. By the time a 15 week session is played the operator has scores, and his observations to help him make the necessary adjustments.

A lot of work, but it can work.

We've already pointed out the flaws and the stupity of your so-called handicapping system. Gave you a series of questions which you still haven't addressed, cuz it demonstrated all the stupid assumptions in your stupid system that amounts to jack sh*t. As was said, you avoided those questions, cuz you know the obvious flaws that were exposed.

I recommend local handicapping to give beginners a boost as they enter the world of competitive pool. A necessary evil if you will. Why would they play if they had no chance? So, give them a boost.

Yet, you bash every handicap system out there, unless of course it's your stupid version, despite its obvious flaws. Stupid comments that are consistent with lil Burnout Boy.

Then, take the Allstars from your league (those you deem can compete on a national level; or probably the best players you have) and send them to national tournaments where everything is played scratch.

First of all, you ignore the fact that the so-called Allstars, are the some of the prime examples of the ones that you have already underrated. Clear flaw in your system. And you're going to have ones who are the worst of the next highest level, many of whom will not be as good as your so-called Allstars from the other level.

Did you even note, that was what was posted in the last message, that everyone would play straight up? NO, obviously you didn't.... Obvious verification of your stupidity. Geez, catch a clue one day at least.

Have a local playoff amongst the teams, including handicaps, so the beginners and intermediates have a meaningful event to play for and learn from.

Of course with your beginner and intermediate system, you fail to recognize that by dividing and classifying your way, you have a handicapping system (but you bash any handicapping system - so you're bi-polar once again). Players will easily sandbag so that they are underrated in your system. What standards (which is the key to this thread) do you even use that guide your classification system? By mentioning none, that has relegated your post to USELESS. What happens if you actually grow past your small scale system, would you further subdivide i.e. split your beginners, and split your intermediate?



You're talkin old news, that doesn't even correlate one iota to this thread. If you can't make any positive contributions, then simply get the f**k out.

Don't even bother to respond, lil Burnout Boy, cuz your message will simply be ignored.

Go back to your cryogenically frozen stupid handicapping system that you ridiculously try to push. Now, after we ignore Teacherman's stupidity - broken record that will always lead to the same sick conclusion. Your burnout posts are not welcomed here. Unless we all ignore Teacherman's inane posts, then it'll always lead to the same old conversation. Maybe we can get back to a legitimate conversation of the topic at hand.

 

[Teacherman]

The saying about having never been in the arena must have really hit your button.

You have quite a mouthpiece.

 

[FLICKit]

The saying about having never been in the arena must have really hit your button.

You have quite a mouthpiece.

Get off your lil soapbox with your same old message. You're welcome to contribute some new and positive information. Until then, we can duke it out, if you must....

 

[Teacherman]

It is so much fun to control you FLICKit. You need to change your name to FlICKa because I ride you like My Friend Flicka.

 

[FLICKit]

It is so much fun to control you FLICKit. You need to change your name to FlICKa because I ride you like My Friend Flicka.

Move it to the Flame Thread.

 

[MrLucky]

degenerative diseases!

I am new to posting here, I do post often on other sites but in the short time I have been here I notice a lot of negativity and poor tolerance for others ? or perhaps each others point of view ! Is this what a "Discussion forum" is about on AZ? just wondering?

 

[DaveK]

I am new to posting here, I do post often on other sites but in the short time I have been here I notice a lot of negativity and poor tolerance for others ? or perhaps each others point of view ! Is this what a "Discussion forum" is about on AZ? just wondering?

It's changed a bit over the last month or so in my experience ... and not for the better IMO. Still lot's of good stuff if you ignore the excrement. Stick with us ...


Dave

 

[Rickw]

I agree with Teacherman about having the "league operator" (I would say tournament director) keenly observe how players play to ensure that players are given a more accurate rating. To me, this is the only way a handicap system can really work effectively. Someone has to put the time and work in to ensure people are rated accurately. No rating system is going to work well if it and the players are not scrupulously watched and evaluated by an impartial party.

 

[MrLucky]

I agree with Teacherman about having the "league operator" (I would say tournament director) keenly observe how players play to ensure that players are given a more accurate rating. To me, this is the only way a handicap system can really work effectively. Someone has to put the time and work in to ensure people are rated accurately. No rating system is going to work well if it and the players are not scrupulously watched and evaluated by an impartial party.

Good ideas, I play APA and have watched the League battles to correct the system while some on the other side battle equally hard to corrupt it!

 

[FLICKit]

I agree with Teacherman about having the "league operator" (I would say tournament director) keenly observe how players play to ensure that players are given a more accurate rating. To me, this is the only way a handicap system can really work effectively. Someone has to put the time and work in to ensure people are rated accurately. No rating system is going to work well if it and the players are not scrupulously watched and evaluated by an impartial party.

Of course, you gotta be able to have some sort of guidelines to go by in determining a player's ability. Have seen many systems that try to rate you on sight, and as a result end up being way off. Not to mention the buddy buddy system, whereby someone is underrated due to them being good friends or simply kindness from the person giving the rating - have also seen people get severely overrated in such a subjective system. Without standards, ratings will be erratic.

What skills are you rating?
Stroking ability
Shot making skills
Position play
Defensive play
Combination Shots
Carom Shots
Ball Selection/Pattern Play
Killer Instinct

Most times you can't accurately rate all of those in a five minute shooting session, where people know they are being rated.

 

[Rickw]

You are absolutely right Flickit, players have to be rated while they're playing in the tournament and are unaware they're being rated. You have to have a very knowledgeable TD or rater to do that. I rated a player at the request of a TD once and the player complained to the TD that I rated him too high and my rating was downgraded by the TD because he didn't want the player to be upset. I looked at his stroke, shotmaking, safeties and kicks and generally how he controlled the cb. The TD in question didn't even see the player play and downgraded him just because he complained. I told the TD not to ever ask me to rate someone again. As far as I'm concerned, this TD was not doing the handicap system any favors or the other players. This incident demonstrates one of the real problems with any handicap system, the difficulty to get good people to run all the tournaments.

Teacherman has his own pool halls and can dictate how his tournaments are run but a big handicap system that is used by many different PHs is very difficult to manage and ensure the quality and standards that I'm sure Teacherman demands.

 

[chefjeff]

Good ideas, I play APA and have watched the League battles to correct the system while some on the other side battle equally hard to corrupt it!

The idea sucks!

Jesus Christ himself could come down and analyze the players and still it wouldn't be accurate.

The only thing that should create a handicap is a person's play in the exact events that require a handicap. Most of us aren't CONSISTENTLY good enough to be judged any other way. I look like a pool god SOMETIMES. But I'm not, so I play some really bad matches right after I've played some really good ones. I'm not good enough to control those swings. Yet, I've had my "handicap" changed based on the LO's one viewing of my play, rather than my actual overall shooting in the league. Ridiculous!

Next, the handicap should apply only to the league being played, not the whole world of pool. If it works accurately in the exact field of play, isn't that the goal??? Why introduce factors that may or may not apply where it matters???

I revealed a nearly perfect handicap 8-ball system in my post, above, for league play. It is soooo simple and works like a charm and is proven so.

Use it and see for yourself
(no assembly required, batteries not included, for ages 6 and over, professional driver do not attempt at home, all warranties and claims represent the advertisers and are not reflective of the management of this stations, tax and dealer fees may apply.)

Jeff Livingston

 

[MrLucky]

Human element...

The idea sucks!

Jesus Christ himself could come down and analyze the players and still it wouldn't be accurate.

The only thing that should create a handicap is a person's play in the exact events that require a handicap. Most of us aren't CONSISTENTLY good enough to be judged any other way. I look like a pool god SOMETIMES. But I'm not, so I play some really bad matches right after I've played some really good ones. I'm not good enough to control those swings. Yet, I've had my "handicap" changed based on the LO's one viewing of my play, rather than my actual overall shooting in the league. Ridiculous!

Next, the handicap should apply only to the league being played, not the whole world of pool. If it works accurately in the exact field of play, isn't that the goal??? Why introduce factors that may or may not apply where it matters???

I revealed a nearly perfect handicap 8-ball system in my post, above, for league play. It is soooo simple and works like a charm and is proven so.

Use it and see for yourself
(no assembly required, batteries not included, for ages 6 and over, professional driver do not attempt at home, all warranties and claims represent the advertisers and are not reflective of the management of this stations, tax and dealer fees may apply.)

Jeff Livingston

IMHO! as long as there is a human factor in handicapping there will disparities and controversy over each persons! that was the one improvement that immediately impacted play and a sandbagging when the computerized handicapping went into play in APA (I know I am showing my age but I started in the old Bush league in 82) if and when the human element can or could be eliminated, which I doubt is possible under present systems, no handicaps will ever be totally accurate and systemetically fair!