APA playoff, regional, national strategy?

[D_Lewis]

This season we barely made the playoffs in our league. I brought in 4 brand new players, SL2/3 at best. They all needed to get their 10 weeks in to qualify for playoffs so we had a less then stellar regular season.

When it came down to playoffs, the way the handicaps worked is that our team lined up like this.
7, 6, 5, 5, 3, 3, 2, 2.

What I decided to do, as captain, in my first playoff experience is this. If I won the toss, I made the other team put up. If they won it, they wanted to put up first anyways which was AWESOME!

First match, they put up a 4, I put up a 5 and won. second, I put up the 6, he won. Their put up, a 4 so I throw up our 7. 3-0 first round.

Second match, they put up a 6 so I threw off a 3 on him knowing that they were playing 7 6 4 3 3, planning on over-powering their lower ranked players. Turns out my SL3 beat the SL6. We put up a 5 who beats their SL7. They put up a SL3 and our other SL5 takes them down. 3-0 again.

Essentially we are trying to throw off on potential losses by our bigger players by getting them to always play a lower ranked player. Why play a SL7 VS SL7 and risk losing the match when we can have an easier match-up.

Is this a good strategy? Any input? Suggestions?

Thanks!
-dan

 

[FLICKit]

Simple answer. Yes. That's exactly what you're supposed to do - whatever it takes to win and more forward.

You want to ensure that you're stronger players are in matches that are favorable for them. If the opposition team leaves themselves vulnerable to a very high level player being matched up against a very low level player on your side, then it's often smart to do it. Giving a 4 point spread in 1 match, means that for the remaining matches you'll have a 4 point advantage... Being able to take advantage of that is the key to winning.

Also of note, many times it is wise to put your team up first. Many times people don't realize that, but it gives your team a lotta of power in the late matches (especially the last 2), if the matches make it that far.

It's all about doing what's best to win 3 matches. That's it. At the higher levels you'll see the other teams do exactly the same.

 

[Da Poet]

Simple answer. Yes. That's exactly what you're supposed to do - whatever it takes to win and more forward.

You want to ensure that you're stronger players are in matches that are favorable for them. If the opposition team leaves themselves vulnerable to a very high level player being matched up against a very low level player on your side, then it's often smart to do it. Giving a 4 point spread in 1 match, means that for the remaining matches you'll have a 4 point advantage... Being able to take advantage of that is the key to winning.

Also of note, many times it is wise to put your team up first. Many times people don't realize that, but it gives your team a lotta of power in the late matches (especially the last 2), if the matches make it that far.

It's all about doing what's best to win 3 matches. That's it. At the higher levels you'll see the other teams do exactly the same.

Exactly!

The key is to not panic if you get an unexpected loss. Often folks will change their plan and throw their strongest player in too early to "stop the bleeding". Just like FLICKit said, do what's best for winning three matches.

 

[D_Lewis]

Exactly!

The key is to not panic if you get an unexpected loss. Often folks will change their plan and throw their strongest player in too early to "stop the bleeding". Just like FLICKit said, do what's best for winning three matches.

Yes, that is the plan. Win 3, even if we have to throw off the first two matches to get good set ups.

 

[Da Poet]

Yes, that is the plan. Win 3, even if we have to throw off the first two matches to get good set ups.

I don't think it's so much a matter of choosing not to win the first two matches as it is how you handle it if it happens.

If you don't know anything about the other team besides their SL's, then it's unlikely you'll get into a situation that you'll need to dodge their first two players unless they do something stupid like put up a six in response to your three in the first match and then lead a seven in number two.

At any rate, have fun and good luck!

 

[watchez]

The best strategy for the APA is to sandbag during the regular league session better than your opponents, giving you the best opportunity to win in the playoffs.

 

[PetToilet]

The best strategy for the APA is to sandbag during the regular league session better than your opponents, giving you the best opportunity to win in the playoffs.

i hate apa

 

[RunoutalloverU]

The best strategy for the APA is to sandbag during the regular league session better than your opponents, giving you the best opportunity to win in the playoffs.

Yes its damn near an art. Im an APA 3 hahahaha. Im desperately trying not to move to a 4. I love it, I run up my innings whenever possible, take the match to hill hill, and "squeak" out a win. Last time me and our 6 played I beat him 9 to 1. APA is a thing of beauty, you just have to learn to play the system like everyone else and realize its just part of it all.

 

[ScottW]

The big issue with APA handicaps is that the handicaps of any given group of local league players is based on the skills of that pile of local league players.

There's a finite range of handicaps (2 to 7) but the skill range, weakest-to-strongest, of the varying groups of league players can vary wildly across the country.

I played APA for about three years steady in Colorado. I moved back to Atlanta a few months ago. And I've noticed that, for the varying handicap values, the players in Atlanta are generally a notch better. What would be a five in Colorado, they're a four here.

I found a little local APA rules/handicapped tournament here recently. Last week I ended up playing a woman, who was a two. I was playing as my last handicap, a six. And this woman - a two - was running several balls, fairly consistently. She had pretty dang good ball control, and was making pretty good choices in shots and where to leave the cue ball. Granted, I won the match - I got my six games, and she got one due to me trying a long kick at the eight-ball and just missing and scratching - but she didn't play like any two *I'd* ever dealt with in Colorado.

So, I believe, despite the system in use being vulnerable to sandbagging - sandbagging is not the cause of 100% of the disparities in skills when two teams from different parts of the country come together at nationals. It's just a weakness in the system as a whole, I think. It's taking two groups with locally-calculated rankings and throwing them together, and there is no easy way to adjust for the discrepencies in skills between like handicapped players on the two teams.

The kicker here is, players will get bumped up a handicap level on the spot out in Vegas - and it may well be those people are the victims, because they are playing like they normally play - and as they are ranked, based on their local league players' skills and results - but they drew a team from a weaker area, so pound-for-pound (or handicap-for-handicap), one player is playing better than the other. And if that player is moved up - when that player goes home, now he/she is having to give up one more game than they used to - and that can hurt THEM.

It's just an inherent flaw in their handicap system.

(edited for typo, meh!)

 

[dogginda9]

The big issue with APA handicaps is that the handicaps of any given group of local league players is based on the skills of that pile of local league players.

There's a finite range of handicaps (2 to 7) but the skill range, weakest-to-strongest, of the varying groups of league players can vary wildly across the country.

I played APA for about three years steady in Colorado. I moved back to Atlanta a few months ago. And I've noticed that, for the varying handicap values, the players in Atlanta are generally a notch better. What would be a five in Colorado, they're a four here.

I found a little local APA rules/handicapped tourament here recently. Last week I ended up playing a woman, who was a two. I was playing as my last handicap, a six. And this woman - a two - was running several balls, fairly consistently. She had pretty dang good ball control, and was making pretty good choices in shots and where to leave the cue ball. Granted, I won the match - I got my six games, and she got one due to me trying a long kick at the eight-ball and just missing and scratching - but she didn't play like any two *I'd* ever dealt with in Colorado.

So, I believe, despite the system in use being vulnerable to sandbagging - sandbagging is not the cause of 100% of the disparities in skills when two teams from different parts of the country come together at nationals. It's just a weakness in the system as a whole, I think. It's taking two groups with locally-calculated rankings and throwing them together, and there is no easy way to adjust for the discrepencies in skills between like handicapped players on the two teams.

The kicker here is, players will get bumped up a handicap level on the spot out in Vegas - and it may well be those people are the victims, because they are playing like they normally play - and as they are ranked, based on their local league players' skills and results - but they drew a team from a weaker area, so pound-for-pound (or handicap-for-handicap), one player is playing better than the other. And if that player is moved up - when that player goes home, now he/she is having to give up one more game than they used to - and that can hurt THEM.

It's just an inherent flaw in their handicap system.

Wow!! So many truths that commonly get overlooked in this post, I don't even know where to begin other than to say, good post.