APA 8 ball scoring

[libtrucker]

I was reading up on another thread, and some people were complaining about the 23 skill level rule, and how the top handicap is 7 in 8ball vs 9 in 9 ball. And I wanted to write this post to get some of your opinions on something I think would be a better way to score 8 ball. Note: This would only work in APA team league matches, or something very similar

Back in the day, you would get 1 point to win a match, 0 points to loose a match. Today, There is a range of getting 3 points or 0, and loosing a match but still getting a point if you can get on the hill. The problem with this is, teams that have alot of low skill level players can really make it difficult to get points as their 2's and 3's can win a game and get points. Around me, a team with a very strong 5/6 and the rest 3's can be pretty strong if the higher skilled player is a good coach.

My idea: 1 point per game win. No matter the skill level, or race. This would force teams to play the 23 rule every match, as you could be leaving points on the table if you dont. So technically you can make up to 23 points per night, and it would have a better chance at forcing players to keep their opponents from winning, as they can score points. So a 6 vs 6, would be a 5-5 race, say the final score was 5-2, the points awarded would be 5-2.

Am I the only one that thinks this would be a better way to score 8 ball? What are the flaws to this?

 

[ctyhntr]

Some league operators have tried Super 30. APA 8-ball with a skill limit of 30 instead of 23. When APA 8-ball was the only league product offered by APA, I heard some league operators and executives broke away and formed TAP.

 

[APA Operator]

I hope you're the only one that thinks this would be better. The biggest flaw obviously is that the lower-skilled players, 2's, 3's, and 4's (who make up over 70% of the league) are seriously devalued, and that's not what this league is about. If a 2 shuts out a 7 they only get 2 points, but if a 7 shuts out a 2 they get 7 points? That would make teams play their 7 against the other team's 2 or 3 every time, because any other matchup and the 7 is only worth five points (leaving points on the table), even in a shutout (harder to do the higher the skill level of the opponent, too). How is this better in anyone's world? 7's already complain about having to play 2's, and the lower skill levels already complain about having to play 7's.

 

[trob]

I hope you're the only one that thinks this would be better. The biggest flaw obviously is that the lower-skilled players, 2's, 3's, and 4's (who make up over 70% of the league) are seriously devalued, and that's not what this league is about. If a 2 shuts out a 7 they only get 2 points, but if a 7 shuts out a 2 they get 7 points? That would make teams play their 7 against the other team's 2 or 3 every time, because any other matchup and the 7 is only worth five points (leaving points on the table), even in a shutout (harder to do the higher the skill level of the opponent, too). How is this better in anyone's world? 7's already complain about having to play 2's, and the lower skill levels already complain about having to play 7's.

Exactly. They system makes no sense lol.

I always wished they would increase the 9 ball 23 rule. I enjoyed their version of 9 ball and the handy cap system but it was so hard being a 9 and keeping together a team.

 

[APA Operator]

Exactly. They system makes no sense lol.

I always wished they would increase the 9 ball 23 rule. I enjoyed their version of 9 ball and the handy cap system but it was so hard being a 9 and keeping together a team.

It is hard, understandably so. But just increasing 23 doesn't solve the problem without also devaluing the lower levels, as most teams don't have a 9. APA has tried to keep some appeal for the most skilled players with formats like Masters and Super 30, but the mainstream formats have to emphasize the importance of the beginners.

Here's why it's important that 1's and 2's feel needed. It's the only way we've found to grow the sport. Beginners have to have a reason to try the sport - some will like it, many will not. The turnover is the greatest at the lowest levels, but if nobody gives them a reason to try it, the ones who end up liking it (mainly 3's and higher, most beginners who get the bug eventually reach SL3 or higher) won't ever be invited to play on teams and the sport will not grow. You don't grow the sport by attracting those who already participate.

People like to claim the 23 rule is some kind of marketing scam designed just to grow team counts. But it was never designed to do that, that's one of the side effects of growing participation in the sport as a whole. A rising tide lifts all boats, right? I would venture to claim that CSI, VNEA, TAP, NAPA, and other "competitors" (quoted because we consider our real competitors to be other avenues for entertainment besides billiards), and even tournaments get more participation today because of APA's 23 rule. Heck, some of them might not even exist were it not for APA and their 23 rule.

23 could probably be increased today without too many dominant teams forming. There are a lot more 5's and higher than there were back when 23 was determined as the point where teams couldn't dominate, so there's more competition at the higher levels and a team at say 24 or even 25 might not be as dominant as they were then. So leagues could exist without falling completely apart. But then we'd be reducing the incentive for the beginners to try the sport. And until someone comes up with a better way to get them in, 23 is not going to change.

 

[buckshotshoey]

It is hard, understandably so. But just increasing 23 doesn't solve the problem without also devaluing the lower levels, as most teams don't have a 9. APA has tried to keep some appeal for the most skilled players with formats like Masters and Super 30, but the mainstream formats have to emphasize the importance of the beginners.

Here's why it's important that 1's and 2's feel needed. It's the only way we've found to grow the sport. Beginners have to have a reason to try the sport - some will like it, many will not. The turnover is the greatest at the lowest levels, but if nobody gives them a reason to try it, the ones who end up liking it (mainly 3's and higher, most beginners who get the bug eventually reach SL3 or higher) won't ever be invited to play on teams and the sport will not grow. You don't grow the sport by attracting those who already participate.

People like to claim the 23 rule is some kind of marketing scam designed just to grow team counts. But it was never designed to do that, that's one of the side effects of growing participation in the sport as a whole. A rising tide lifts all boats, right? I would venture to claim that CSI, VNEA, TAP, NAPA, and other "competitors" (quoted because we consider our real competitors to be other avenues for entertainment besides billiards), and even tournaments get more participation today because of APA's 23 rule. Heck, some of them might not even exist were it not for APA and their 23 rule.

23 could probably be increased today without too many dominant teams forming. There are a lot more 5's and higher than there were back when 23 was determined as the point where teams couldn't dominate, so there's more competition at the higher levels and a team at say 24 or even 25 might not be as dominant as they were then. So leagues could exist without falling completely apart. But then we'd be reducing the incentive for the beginners to try the sport. And until someone comes up with a better way to get them in, 23 is not going to change.

"A rising tide lifts all boats, right"?

Except for the ones with a giant hole in their bottom..... pun intended.

I wish there were enough players in my area to form a Masters league. It is the answer to many issues. No handicap limit, playing 8 ball AND 9 ball, 3 players playing each night (no getting out at 11pm or later because of 5 players and slow play).

Our BCA league is very successful and liked because we only play 4 players, round robin. Start at 7pm, done by 10pm for all the working stiffs..... sometimes 9:30.

The main reason I dont play APA any more is the late nights. I cant afford to be tired with the work I do.

 

[hang-the-9]

I was reading up on another thread, and some people were complaining about the 23 skill level rule, and how the top handicap is 7 in 8ball vs 9 in 9 ball. And I wanted to write this post to get some of your opinions on something I think would be a better way to score 8 ball. Note: This would only work in APA team league matches, or something very similar

Back in the day, you would get 1 point to win a match, 0 points to loose a match. Today, There is a range of getting 3 points or 0, and loosing a match but still getting a point if you can get on the hill. The problem with this is, teams that have alot of low skill level players can really make it difficult to get points as their 2's and 3's can win a game and get points. Around me, a team with a very strong 5/6 and the rest 3's can be pretty strong if the higher skilled player is a good coach.

My idea: 1 point per game win. No matter the skill level, or race. This would force teams to play the 23 rule every match, as you could be leaving points on the table if you dont. So technically you can make up to 23 points per night, and it would have a better chance at forcing players to keep their opponents from winning, as they can score points. So a 6 vs 6, would be a 5-5 race, say the final score was 5-2, the points awarded would be 5-2.

Am I the only one that thinks this would be a better way to score 8 ball? What are the flaws to this?

Probably the best handicap system I have seen is the USAPL one where a win was 14 points and the loser got points based on balls they made. This way a "win" is actually a "win" not just an extra point of two. APA 9 ball is just silly scoring, you can lose every game and win by a lot if the opponent only makes the 9 ball each rack. With the USAPL scoring you need to actually try to win the game, but if you don't you still get points for the balls you made.

 

[DeeDeeCues]

Play APA for fun, not competition... There isn't any in the long run. But it can be fun.

As for growing the sport, I don't believe it does. It grows the league, but I rarely see a person who started in APA play anything but APA or similarly heavily handicapped events. I consider handicapped events detrimental. If I only had one person to play pool against and I never won a match fairly, it would be better than playing a thousand people who insist on a huge handicap so they can beat me every time.

 

[ctyhntr]

Exactly. They system makes no sense lol.

I always wished they would increase the 9 ball 23 rule. I enjoyed their version of 9 ball and the handy cap system but it was so hard being a 9 and keeping together a team.

Talk to your APA league operator about Super 30, team cap of 30 instead of 23. It came out a couple of years ago and up to the discretion of the league operator to offer it. This has no road to any of the national tournaments in Las Vegas, so would be offered as a cash league.

 

[trob]

It is hard, understandably so. But just increasing 23 doesn't solve the problem without also devaluing the lower levels, as most teams don't have a 9. APA has tried to keep some appeal for the most skilled players with formats like Masters and Super 30, but the mainstream formats have to emphasize the importance of the beginners.

Here's why it's important that 1's and 2's feel needed. It's the only way we've found to grow the sport. Beginners have to have a reason to try the sport - some will like it, many will not. The turnover is the greatest at the lowest levels, but if nobody gives them a reason to try it, the ones who end up liking it (mainly 3's and higher, most beginners who get the bug eventually reach SL3 or higher) won't ever be invited to play on teams and the sport will not grow. You don't grow the sport by attracting those who already participate.

People like to claim the 23 rule is some kind of marketing scam designed just to grow team counts. But it was never designed to do that, that's one of the side effects of growing participation in the sport as a whole. A rising tide lifts all boats, right? I would venture to claim that CSI, VNEA, TAP, NAPA, and other "competitors" (quoted because we consider our real competitors to be other avenues for entertainment besides billiards), and even tournaments get more participation today because of APA's 23 rule. Heck, some of them might not even exist were it not for APA and their 23 rule.

23 could probably be increased today without too many dominant teams forming. There are a lot more 5's and higher than there were back when 23 was determined as the point where teams couldn't dominate, so there's more competition at the higher levels and a team at say 24 or even 25 might not be as dominant as they were then. So leagues could exist without falling completely apart. But then we'd be reducing the incentive for the beginners to try the sport. And until someone comes up with a better way to get them in, 23 is not going to change.

non sense.. your an apa fan boy. I like apa and it was fun but it’s a business made to bring in new players. They 100% want to keep that 23 rule in place so when players naturally go up a level you have to find new players. You can right a whole novel about it but at the end of the day it’s about bringing in new customers to expand their business. I’m not hating On them for it. They are a business. You guys have this belief they are only in it for the love of the game and this is just childish and silly. They are in it to make money. That’s what a business does.

 

[trob]

Play APA for fun, not competition... There isn't any in the long run. But it can be fun.

As for growing the sport, I don't believe it does. It grows the league, but I rarely see a person who started in APA play anything but APA or similarly heavily handicapped events. I consider handicapped events detrimental. If I only had one person to play pool against and I never won a match fairly, it would be better than playing a thousand people who insist on a huge handicap so they can beat me every time.

The league operator seemed to get annoyed with me when the better players would talk to me asking how to move up when they were stuck at a mid level. I would talk to them about their practice habits but also about playing something outside of apa also so they had to play nuts up against other players. I didn’t tell them to stop playing apa. If your having fun doing it by all means play. The game should be fun but if you want to play better your going to have to play even up with players in other leagues and tournaments.

 

[DeeDeeCues]

The league operator seemed to get annoyed with me when the better players would talk to me asking how to move up when they were stuck at a mid level. I would talk to them about their practice habits but also about playing something outside of apa also so they had to play nuts up against other players. I didn’t tell them to stop playing apa. If your having fun doing it by all means play. The game should be fun but if you want to play better your going to have to play even up with players in other leagues and tournaments.

We're on the exact same page. When I played APA, I was coming back from several years of not playing. I had never heard of APA, but stumbled into a league night at a bar when I was out to play some bar pool. After playing on an open challenge table for a few hours, most of the teams there were recruiting me. I chose to play to assist some of them in their quest to get better.

If you take it for what it is and surround yourself with a team of decent people, it's a hoot. Don't let the twirps who carry the rulebook to the table with them run the night. Don't worry about the sandbaggers and cheaters, they are sad people.

 

[APA Operator]

non sense.. your an apa fan boy. I like apa and it was fun but it’s a business made to bring in new players. They 100% want to keep that 23 rule in place so when players naturally go up a level you have to find new players. You can right a whole novel about it but at the end of the day it’s about bringing in new customers to expand their business. I’m not hating On them for it. They are a business. You guys have this belief they are only in it for the love of the game and this is just childish and silly. They are in it to make money. That’s what a business does.

... a business made to bring in new players... How else does the sport grow? When you have a better, proven, way to get someone into the sport that has never or rarely played the game, come see me and we'll market it. Build a better mouse trap, you know? Until then, your opinion of what's nonsense is, well, nonsense. I don't have any belief that anyone is in it just for the love of the game (way too much BS to deal with for that to be worth it), but APA realized long ago that unless the sport grows, the business doesn't grow. I don't openly compete with or put down competing leagues and tournaments, because they offer diversity for those who already enjoy the sport. That's important too.

 

[Zerksies]

I'd like to be able to play a Solo league without having to join a team. I was already a well establish player before I joined a league. I was given the lowest rating possible. I was getting weight from guys i was giving to in cash games. Week after week my rating went up just one point.

It was funny my first week. I broke and ran out every rack, the other guy never got too shoot and my rating went up one point. What a damn joke.

I only made it one season, too many people bickering all night. I just wanted to play pool. I didn't want to have to deal with "team" drama.

 

[WobblyStroke]

I'd like to be able to play a Solo league without having to join a team. I was already a well establish player before I joined a league. I was given the lowest rating possible. I was getting weight from guys i was giving to in cash games. Week after week my rating went up just one point.

It was funny my first week. I broke and ran out every rack, the other guy never got too shoot and my rating went up one point. What a damn joke.

I only made it one season, too many people bickering all night. I just wanted to play pool. I didn't want to have to deal with "team" drama.

Solo league like a golf men's league would be nice. But I guess small tourneys is as close as we will get to that for now. And even those can be too much of a time commitment for a day.
Re: ranking, I think league operators have some discretion here. I also played CPA (Canadian APA) which is basically same thing north of the border, when I returned to play after a long break from the game just to get some table time. I didn't run every rack like you on my first day, but they started me at 3 and I was a 6 the following week due to low innings.

 

[Zerksies]

Solo league like a golf men's league would be nice. But I guess small tourneys is as close as we will get to that for now. And even those can be too much of a time commitment for a day.
Re: ranking, I think league operators have some discretion here. I also played CPA (Canadian APA) which is basically same thing north of the border, when I returned to play after a long break from the game just to get some table time. I didn't run every rack like you on my first day, but they started me at 3 and I was a 6 the following week due to low innings.

I'd really like something like that. Maybe a night a week where you play a match or two or maybe something on a weekend afternoon. Rated or not, but something with a realistic rating or uncapped.

 

[ACL]

I'd really like something like that. Maybe a night a week where you play a match or two or maybe something on a weekend afternoon. Rated or not, but something with a realistic rating or uncapped.

I completely agree. I think it would be kinda cool.

 

[Zerksies]

I completely agree. I think it would be kinda cool.

i have a wife and a young kid. I don't wanna hang out in a bar with drinkers that occasionally play pool till 11pm and not have a challenge. I'd rather play in a pool hall with players. Be in an out in two hours. I'd definitely be up for that

 

[DeeDeeCues]

I'd like to be able to play a Solo league without having to join a team. I was already a well establish player before I joined a league. I was given the lowest rating possible. I was getting weight from guys i was giving to in cash games. Week after week my rating went up just one point.

It was funny my first week. I broke and ran out every rack, the other guy never got too shoot and my rating went up one point. What a damn joke.

I only made it one season, too many people bickering all night. I just wanted to play pool. I didn't want to have to deal with "team" drama.

You had the option to come in at a higher rating.

I came in as a five, argued with my team that I should have been a seven. Turns out they were right... After waiting every week until after midnight and a dozen drinks, going in cold, I did play like a five.

 

[u12armresl]

I'd like to be able to play a Solo league without having to join a team. I was already a well establish player before I joined a league. I was given the lowest rating possible. I was getting weight from guys i was giving to in cash games. Week after week my rating went up just one point.

It was funny my first week. I broke and ran out every rack, the other guy never got too shoot and my rating went up one point. What a damn joke.

I only made it one season, too many people bickering all night. I just wanted to play pool. I didn't want to have to deal with "team" drama.

How many times have you broken your hand patting yourself on the back?