APA Needs to re-examine the handicap system!

Brozif

Brozif

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
First let me say that I have not started this thread so that we can bash the APA! The APA has done and continues to do a lot for the game of pool, and they deserve a lot of credit. If you don't like the APA, then stay away and let those of us that play in the APA and continue to support the APA to complain about it. We earn the right to do so, because we are still involved with it.

That being said, I think the skill levels in 8 & 9-ball should be re-examined. A long time ago, I played in the APA league in the Bellevue, Nebraska area and in that league I was a 6 in 8-ball. I competed pretty good with other 6's and once in a while I could give 7's a run, but that was only the case once in a while!! The 7's in that league were no joke! You could very easily lose the whole match by just losing the lag. They would and many times did, just break and run out the set. The only way to slow them down was to win the lag, make what you could when you could, and if not...play safe!! I have been to Vegas several times now and have seen this same level of play from many other 7's from around the country.

I now live in and play in the Newport News, VA area and I'm here to tell you that except for only a few (and I'm talking about maybe a handfull), the 7's in this area are extremely overrated!! In this area I am a 7, but even I know that if I compete in a national event, I would get murdered by true 7's!! That's why I think there should be another skill level. The 7 skill level has so much room. You could be a person that is at the very low end of the 7 pool, or a person that should be playing professionally yet chooses not to lose their amateur status. No other skill level has such a huge gap without the possibility of going up.

All this is just as true in the 9-ball side. The other issue with 9-ball is why the 23 rule has not been raised when you've added two higher skill levels and one lower one. Also, who in their right mind has made the decision that a male cannot be a skill level 1 (9-ball) or 2 (8-ball) in a higher level tournament simply because they're male? Skill level is not predetermined by gender. If a woman can be good enough to be a skill level 7, then a man can be bad enough to be a skill level 2! It's called being a beginner! If there's so much worry about sandbagging, then let them be watched the same way other skill levels are watched. It is much harder to sandbag and stay a 2 and if you're succesful at it, then you must have had help from the opposing teams. People fail to realize that just because safeties don't have to be called, doesn't mean that the player did not play one. When you play an opponent that is a 2 or 3, have one of your higher players watch them. They should be able to tell if the player is sandbagging and mark certain misses as safeties. If you don't get into the habit of marking safeties, then you are allowing the sandbagging to go on.
 
You make some valid points. I'm sure these thoughts are brought up and considered at APA HQ, so they must have a reason to keep things the way they are.

Still, I've often wondered about the math involved for 9-ball teams. I don't play APA 9-ball, so I've not seen how it works out, but the 8's and 9's have got to make things interesting.

I'll be interested to see comments from some of the other involved APA folks that post here frequently. Hopefully the thread won't get buried in bashing like they usually do when those three letters get mentioned...
 
Brozif said:
First let me say that I have not started this thread so that we can bash the APA!

All this is just as true in the 9-ball side. The other issue with 9-ball is why the 23 rule has not been raised when you've added two higher skill levels and one lower one.
Click to expand...

First off, if this thread makes 2 or more pages, you're gonna get some bashing on it most assuredly.

The second part of what I quoted I can only say that I believe the "senior skill level" rule (page 61 of the APA Official Team Manual, section 6, rule #2) was instituted to stave off the need to change the 9-ball 23-limit. I am not a fan of this rule as I don't see a need for it if your 5 players on any given night do not exceed the 23-rule. If you want to play three 6's and two 2's (within the 23-rule limit) then you should be able to. This is/was the whole purpose of the 23-rule to begin with.

Certainly the APA Equalizer System could probably use some "tweaking". The current system isn't a terrible one. It has it good and bad points. The real problem with it is that it is never going to work as intended without a TOTAL CONSCIENCE EFFORT of PROPER scorekeeping from BOTH sides, and an HONEST league operator to stand behind it! Therein lies the problem.

Maniac
 
I see the APA is marketed as a beginner intermediate league, as such their 8-ball handicap range is geared towards that audience. Around here, 9-Ball C (some), C+s (most), B (definitely) players make it as SL 7, the highest 8-ball rank in the APA league.

Another way is to look a the situation is the APA handicap scale is like the old car speedometer that only goes up to 85 mph. Picture an an 80's Corvette racing an Honda CRX. They both shouldn't have any problems hitting 85mph (for our purpose the APA SL7 handicap). If you think 85mph is the highest that you can achieve, and all cars hitting 85mph are equal then its going to give you false sense of confidence.

If you're frustrated, then shop around for a different league, where the handicaps are geared towards higher level players. Check out BCA, ACS, 9-ball leagues, I'm sure their speedometers go up to 140mph.:D
 
Last edited:
ctyhntr said:
The APA is marketed as a beginner intermediate league, as such their 8-ball handicap range is geared towards that audience. Around here, 9-Ball C (some), C+s (most), B (definitely) players make it as SL 7, the highest 8-ball rank in the APA league.

Another way is to look a the situation is the APA handicap scale is like the old car speedometer that only goes up to 85 mph. Picture an an 80's Corvette racing an Honda CRX. They both shouldn't have any problems hitting 85mph (for our purpose the APA SL7 handicap). If you think 85mph is the highest that you can achieve, its going to give you false sense of confidence.

If you're frustrated, then shop around for a different league, where the handicaps are geared towards higher level players. Check out BCA, ACS, 9-ball leagues, I'm sure their speedometers go up to 140mph.:D
Click to expand...

It's not that I'm frustrated with it to the point that I would give up playing in it. I think the APA for as many faults that it has, it has far more benefits. I love being able to bring new people into the game. Introducing pool to more players can never be a bad thing. I just wish that the APA would listen to it's players and be more receptive to their ideas. Not all of the ideas are bad, some have quite a bit of merit to them.

If like you say, hitting 85mph makes you a 7. Then there are a lot of 7's in my league who'se cars only make it to 86mph! On a good day!! As much as we want to compete and try to do well at Nationals, there are just areas who'se 7's hit 150mph and more. To me, it's like I'm an old stock Trans Am trying to compete with Bughatti's and Lamborghini's.

I guess the simple answer would be to just keep practicing to get up to that level, because it doesn't seem that the APA will ever take that idea into consideration.
 
Your handicap is determined by the quality of your opponent. I play apa 2 nights a week. One night is leaps and bounds stronger than the other. I;m a 4 and on the weaker night a can constantly beat 5-6 and the occasional 7 on a good night but on the strongest night i constantly get beat by 3's in 2 games straight and less than 8 innings. If i only played on the weaker night I would be a 5-6 within a session or 2.
 
I think that part of the issue is the part of the country that you play league. The skill levels are dependent on the competition that you are presently playing. Good or Bad, it's the way that APA works. If the players in the league are overall better in Nebraska than where you are playing now, that will affect the strength of all skill levels not just the 7's.

LOL, same thoughts as the above post.
 
dardusm said:
I think that part of the issue is the part of the country that you play league. The skill levels are dependent on the competition that you are presently playing. Good or Bad, it's the way that APA works. If the players in the league are overall better in Nebraska than where you are playing now, that will affect the strength of all skill levels not just the 7's.

LOL, same thoughts as the above post.
Click to expand...

Yet, we are all asked to compete nationally at the same level? If that's the case, then depending on the skill level of the area you play in, the 2's from those good areas, could be 4's in a weaker area. What if the person being watched for sandbagging isn't sandbagging in their area, but they're being watched by somone that plays in one of those weaker areas. The person observing being used to their players playing so much different, would automatically assume that the player was sandbagging. Something just seems off to me.
 
Brozif said:
Yet, we are all asked to compete nationally at the same level? If that's the case, then depending on the skill level of the area you play in, the 2's from those good areas, could be 4's in a weaker area. What if the person being watched for sandbagging isn't sandbagging in their area, but they're being watched by somone that plays in one of those weaker areas. The person observing being used to their players playing so much different, would automatically assume that the player was sandbagging. Something just seems off to me.
Click to expand...

That's the problem with anything handicapped, it's tough to be truly fair.
 
Brozif said:
First let me say that I have not started this thread so that we can bash the APA! The APA has done and continues to do a lot for the game of pool, and they deserve a lot of credit. If you don't like the APA, then stay away and let those of us that play in the APA and continue to support the APA to complain about it. We earn the right to do so, because we are still involved with it.

That being said, I think the skill levels in 8 & 9-ball should be re-examined. A long time ago, I played in the APA league in the Bellevue, Nebraska area and in that league I was a 6 in 8-ball. I competed pretty good with other 6's and once in a while I could give 7's a run, but that was only the case once in a while!! The 7's in that league were no joke! You could very easily lose the whole match by just losing the lag. They would and many times did, just break and run out the set. The only way to slow them down was to win the lag, make what you could when you could, and if not...play safe!! I have been to Vegas several times now and have seen this same level of play from many other 7's from around the country.

I now live in and play in the Newport News, VA area and I'm here to tell you that except for only a few (and I'm talking about maybe a handfull), the 7's in this area are extremely overrated!! In this area I am a 7, but even I know that if I compete in a national event, I would get murdered by true 7's!! That's why I think there should be another skill level. The 7 skill level has so much room. You could be a person that is at the very low end of the 7 pool, or a person that should be playing professionally yet chooses not to lose their amateur status. No other skill level has such a huge gap without the possibility of going up.

All this is just as true in the 9-ball side. The other issue with 9-ball is why the 23 rule has not been raised when you've added two higher skill levels and one lower one. Also, who in their right mind has made the decision that a male cannot be a skill level 1 (9-ball) or 2 (8-ball) in a higher level tournament simply because they're male? Skill level is not predetermined by gender. If a woman can be good enough to be a skill level 7, then a man can be bad enough to be a skill level 2! It's called being a beginner! If there's so much worry about sandbagging, then let them be watched the same way other skill levels are watched. It is much harder to sandbag and stay a 2 and if you're succesful at it, then you must have had help from the opposing teams. People fail to realize that just because safeties don't have to be called, doesn't mean that the player did not play one. When you play an opponent that is a 2 or 3, have one of your higher players watch them. They should be able to tell if the player is sandbagging and mark certain misses as safeties. If you don't get into the habit of marking safeties, then you are allowing the sandbagging to go on.
Click to expand...

I have played in the APA for a very long time. When I began, there was a designation known as a S7 or Super 7. If my memory serves me correctly, an S7 had to spot 1 game to another 7 and 2 games to a 6 etc. It basically made it harder for the S7 to dominate the way you are talking about.

The designation was removed after my first year of playing.

I agree with you that it is difficult for a low end 7 to compete straight up against a high end 7 and the S7 designation would make it a little fairer without changing the 23 rule.

Leagueguy
 
Last edited:
LeagueGuy said:
I have played in the APA for a very long time. When I began, there was a designation known as a S7 or Super 7. If my memory serves me correctly, an S7 had to spot 1 game to another 7 and 2 games to a 6 etc. It basically made it harder for the S7 to dominate the way you are talking about.

The designation was removed after my first year of playing.

I agree with you that it is difficult for a low end 7 to compete straight up against a high end 7 and the S7 designation would make it a little fairer without changing the 23 rule.

Leagueguy
Click to expand...

I like that system. Too bad it isn't still used today. Do you have any insight into that, and/or whether the issue comes up with the home office folks?

(Not that it applies to me, certainly! :p Here locally there is one player that would certainly apply to, within our league. Not a major issue, but it would be interesting.)
 
I've actually stumbled across the handicapping system formula for the APA and it's the fairest of all the handicap systems I've seen. It all comes down to those marking the scoresheets (seriously).

If you unbiasedly look up and down each roster, every underhandicapped player is equalized by an overhandicapped player (excluding new players). Sometimes one team will have more of one than the other, but overall it's steady. There will always be people who play the system, keep themselves low, but that's the nature of any handicapped league/tournament.

We all remember the one underhandicapped player, but never the overhandicapped ones, that's the human nature in us. You'll always see people say "such and such is a SL3 and they ran out in 2 innings against me" Well, what about the times where a SL6 took 7 innings to beat a SL3?

I've always wondered why there aren't higher handicaps as well, but now that I truly think about it, even minor tweaking wouldn't benefit the league as much as some may think. I'll explain;

Having the 23 rule forces teams to bring in beginners (new revenue), because the SL6s and SL7 will find their place on rosters.

If higher handicaps are introduced to allow parity at the higher levels, that means the 23 rule must be raised, right? If not, then you could be seeing lineups like 94433 just so the 9 could play. One might argue that the handicap system for 9 ball works, so why not allow the 8 ball format to adopt it? Well that's simple, because 9 ball isn't really 9 ball. It's ball count, so you could hypothetically make every 9 ball and still lose the match. The way they structured 9 ball and it's ball count forces them to add a few extra levels. IMO, that's not necessary for 8 ball.

If you add 8s and 9s and raise the 23-rule, then teams that don't have 8s or 9s will be the ones benefitting from this. Lets say (for arguments sake) the rule is raised to 25 with the addition of SL8 and SL9, now teams can run 55555, which means all 5 players are at an intermediate level and there are no beginners to introduce. No beginners = no extra profit.

Also having 8s and 9s means much longer races, which would mean much longer nights at the bar than some would like.

Also, IMO the SL7 has a lot of variance in terms of skill between one another, yes, but that's expected at any tournament with a cap on the levels of handicap. I have seen a player lose the lag and not shoot the entire match, and I know there are SL7s that are not capable of doing that, but they should at least be able to hold control of every opportunity.

Enough rambling, I doubt anyone read half of that anyways.:lmao:

Oh, and I like the S7, idea, it's a small addition that is hard to argue against.
 
I also don't get why they don't raise the 23 rule for 9 ball. Their explanation is that it's because you can have a 1 in 9 ball and not 8 ball. My problem is that in an eight ball match you can put up two 7s and still have room for a 5 and two 2s. This match sequence is very possible to have. In 9ball you can put up 2 9s, but the rest of the match is very hard to come by considering that you can't do it without a 1 on your team no matter what.

I just don't understand why they don't raise the limit in 9 ball to 25. I also don't understand why they don't have a pushout rule for 9 ball since it would help lower handicaps more than anyone. They may push into an easy shot, but I doubt that it would be easier than BiH.
 
Someone with an opinion please explain to me why in APA 8-ball you can play a 7-6-6-2-2 lineup but in 9-ball you cannot, although you are still within the 23-rule limit???

Why the "Senior skill level" rule???

Maniac
 
When I first got back into pool a couple of years ago, I was asked to shoot on an 8-ball APA team up here. While it was fun for a bit (i was also playing in a bar rules traveling league too) When i started bouncing between a 6 and a 7 after a few weeks, I realized it just wasn't the kind of league I was interested in playing in. Not to knock it, there are tons of players who benefit from the format. This being said, the league up here is notoriously weak. The only 2 SL7's are locked in from about a decade ago (they explained to me exactly how they became permanent 7's, but I can't remember the specifics, other than it sounded ridiculous because they're both C+ players), Because of their rankings, now if they play someone and lose, it gives their opponent an artificially high score for that match, possibly raising their ranking. So you've got teams with 6's who would be 4's in a strong league, 5's who would be 3's/4's etc etc. What I've suggested when i've stopped in their on league night to shoot with some friends on the league on the practice table, is the APA should have a league modifier on maximum points per team. The very strong leagues, could have a -1 or -2 to the maximum points (23 right?) while the very weak leagues could have a +1 or +2. Or even just add a small multiplier to everyones score from the league, like -.2 to each player, it would create a more balanced regional/national tournament.
 
I absolutely agree with the huge differences in 7's. I'm a seven in APA 8 ball, and I'm a good player, working on my game to improve. But there is a night and day difference between my skills and the really good players, who are also 7's. And We are loosing people ranked as I am, because if we don't captain a team, we have a hard time finding a team that isn't already number locked. I think it should cap off at 26 for 8 & 9 ball, and raise the skill level to 9 as a high in 8 ball. It would keep from breaking up teams of friends on an annual basis. I bowl on the same team for 23 years. I would not continue bowling, were it not for the friends I have on the team. We have time vested together. One cannot do that in the APA pool. I think it would add to the fun and commoraderie, and make pool and pool leagues stronger. I can't seem to get that point across to the owners of our APA league here in Alabama. I'm 56 years old, and I've seen so many people drop out and disappear, because of number locked teams. I get the same answer, that the APA is for beginner pool players. Shouldn't it also be for those of us who have been in it, and with them for many years? We've put a bunch of money in it, with very little return, when you compare it to bowling leagues. It feels good to have a chance to get a return on your money at the end of a session.
Thanks for this thread.
 
Regrettably, that's the conclusion I've come to. After reaching SL 7, which can take as little as being a C or C+, (my 85mph speedometer analogy) there nothing to handicap and gauge between a week SL7 (C or C+) or a strong SL 7 (A,B, or even Open level) player. At that point, the fairness of the handicap chart is useless.

As a beginner-intermediate level league, it appears to be working for 250,000 players every week. For the higher level player seeking more competition, they're better off suited finding a league that caters to higher level players. i.e 9-ball, where the weak SL7 would be competitively handicapped as a C, C+ and the B, A player. On the flip side, anything less than a SL5, could be a D.


Brozif said:
If like you say, hitting 85mph makes you a 7. Then there are a lot of 7's in my league who'se cars only make it to 86mph! On a good day!! As much as we want to compete and try to do well at Nationals, there are just areas who'se 7's hit 150mph and more. To me, it's like I'm an old stock Trans Am trying to compete with Bughatti's and Lamborghini's.

I guess the simple answer would be to just keep practicing to get up to that level, because it doesn't seem that the APA will ever take that idea into consideration.
Click to expand...
 
Im not allowed to play in the APA ever since i lit a bag of poo on the doorstep of the head office :sorry:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top