APA team question

[CreeDo]

This comes up all the time in our league so I thought I'd see how other teams handle it.

Say your team has a very strong player (7/8/9) who almost never loses,
and a very weak player (1/2/3) who almost never wins.

In order to for the strong player to shoot, the weak player always has to shoot also,
or else the team can't make numbers (i.e. they exceed the 23 limit).

Optionally, they both can sit and the team can just play their middle-of-the-field players.

So what do you think is better?
Play the 9 + 2, for one guaranteed win and one guaranteed loss.
Play a couple of 4/5/6's instead for a semi-random outcome... might be 2 wins, 2 losses, one of each.

 

[ideologist]

All depends on the team. Did the 9 get recruited with the assurance he would play every week? Then you should honor that. I've always believed that APA teams should be built around their power hitters, since they are consistent points.

Is it a bunch of friends all coming out and drinking together? The 9 probably won't mind sitting every so often. And the team won't mind it either.

Strategywise, personally, I would save the 9 for as long as possible and throw the 1 at whomever they had the best chance of beating. a 5 having a bad spell or something.

 

[justadub]

Depends on your opponents. If they have a similarly strong player, I want my guy for him. Also, if they have a weak player, that may give your weak player an opportunity, too.

Other weeks it may make more sense to play the rest of the crew.

We have to do that balancing act a bit, as well. Comes with the package, especially once you get players SL8 or 9.

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

This comes up all the time in our league so I thought I'd see how other teams handle it.

Say your team has a very strong player (7/8/9) who almost never loses,
and a very weak player (1/2/3) who almost never wins.

In order to for the strong player to shoot, the weak player always has to shoot also,
or else the team can't make numbers (i.e. they exceed the 23 limit).

Optionally, they both can sit and the team can just play their middle-of-the-field players.

So what do you think is better?
Play the 9 + 2, for one guaranteed win and one guaranteed loss.
Play a couple of 4/5/6's instead for a semi-random outcome... might be 2 wins, 2 losses, one of each.

Common APA strategy is to field a team with options. The first three matches should allow you the option of playing two middle players OR your 9/2 and allow the situation to dictate which approach is best. I usually only play APA 8ball and I'm a 7 so I'm very hip to this style of matching-up. We will always have a 3 waiting to play if I play. If we go up 2-0 or 2-1, I close the door. If we go down 0-2 or 1-2, I sit. There are a handful of exceptions to this strategy but assuming I'm the only 7 in the room, this is what's normally done. If there's a strong 7 on the other team, I might play no matter what.

 

[Maniac]

and throw the 1 at whomever they had the best chance of beating. a 5 having a bad spell or something.

Maybe not so good of an idea because if you MUST have the SL1/SL2 play for your SL9 to get to play also, you really don't want your SL1/SL2 to win very often. If they move up a skill level, your SL9 is toast!!!

Otherwise, your other observations are spot-on.

Maniac

 

[Indiana Skinny]

Maybe not so good of an idea because if you MUST have the SL1/SL2 play for your SL9 to get to play also, you really don't want your SL1/SL2 to win very often. If they move up a skill level, your SL9 is toast!!!

Otherwise, your other observations are spot-on.

Maniac

:thumbup:

As captain you have to learn how to manage handicaps from the chair. I had a super 4 that I was doing well with until he got the bug and decided to play on multiple teams... I knew it wouldn't be long and he'd be a 5. His other team threw him on a 7 the last 2 weeks of league (which he won) now he's a 5...

With qualifier in 2 weeks and the cities 2 weeks after... it's not the best timing.

Good thing I didn't put all my eggs in one basket this round... I have the potential to be on 5 teams in the cities... 3 8 ball and 2 9 ball.. =)

 

[Bambu]

If I really needed a win, I just wouldn't play my 2. Unless its a sleeper of a 2, a decent 3 plays so much better. Might be the strongest 1 point adjustment you can make.

If I ever run another team I would want 2 sevens and a boatload of 3's. And I want female 3's that don't have much interest in improving. Shot makers with high heels no cue ball.

 

[justadub]

:thumbup:

As captain you have to learn how to manage handicaps from the chair. I had a super 4 that I was doing well with until he got the bug and decided to play on multiple teams... I knew it wouldn't be long and he'd be a 5. His other team threw him on a 7 the last 2 weeks of league (which he won) now he's a 5...

With qualifier in 2 weeks and the cities 2 weeks after... it's not the best timing.

Good thing I didn't put all my eggs in one basket this round... I have the potential to be on 5 teams in the cities... 3 8 ball and 2 9 ball.. =)

Oh my heavens, handicap management.....we recently found ourselves in quite a spot. My 9-ball team has had six different players go up this session! And we were LTC qualified after last summer's session....sigh. States in 4 weeks....our best player went up to SL8, and our SL4 went up to a 5, so now we can't play the SL8, unless someone goes back down.

We've done well, but not so we that I could forsee all of these players going up this session. Hell, we came in second place for the session! Our LO has never had a team have that many in one session. We're just trail-blazers, I guess

 

[D WEATHERSBY II]

On my team, my 2 averages a 14-6 loss. So as a 9, a 14-6 win must be averaged just to break even. Breaking even does no good for the team. So I believe that unless a 9 averages a 17-3 win, he does not help his team unless it is a situation where his S/L fits and only a win is necessary. My 2 cents.

 

[Fatboy]

i'd rather be eaten alive by fire ants than play league pool

but if you enjoy it, its all good, anything that puts cues in players hands is ok.

 

[ideologist]

Maybe not so good of an idea because if you MUST have the SL1/SL2 play for your SL9 to get to play also, you really don't want your SL1/SL2 to win very often. If they move up a skill level, your SL9 is toast!!!

Otherwise, your other observations are spot-on.

Maniac

True, but if you have a 1 or a 4 to post against a 5, and the 4 is lame, no need to take 2 losses in a night by throwing the 1 at whomever and losing, and watching the 5 grind up your 4.

I don't have a 9-ball team so I can't really speak as an expert in handicap management, I just like to game.

 

[Celophanewrap]

The real trick is keeping your 1, 2, or 3 at that level so that your 8 or 9 can play. There is a very delicate balance in sacrificing your lower s/l player so higher s/l can play. In the APA, pretty much as soon as your 1 or 2 gets winning percentage, they raise their s/l. Your 9 most likely would rather play other 8's and 9's so the points for the win, usually
12 - 8, or 13 - 7 almost make it a sort of a Pyrrhic victory. While the 9 is a nice problem to have it's usually tough to find and keep interested a 1 or 2 to go along with them. When we did have a 9, they played sparingly. Sort of like our nuclear deterrent, as if to say, "We have a 9, and we might just turn him loose"

 

[jonanthans]

The way we handle it is, we almost never match our SL 8/9 against another SL 8/9, simply because either player is capable of running rack after rack. Doesn't matter how strong you are, you cant do anything when you aren't at the table, and you can end up taking a loss with your horse and still having to play that SL 1/2. We prefer to offset, have our horse run over a 5/6, and try to match our 1 on a player that wont run racks, (SL 1/2/3/4s). A 1 only has to get 14 balls total, so she is usually capable of getiing to 6-7 balls against these weaker players, which usually ends up netting us around 6-7 points with her loss. Any time you can get those points out of a SL 1, you take it and say thanks. .Different scenarios of course dictate different strategy, but that is our basic strategy heading into the matches..

 

[justadub]

The way we handle it is, we almost never match our SL 8/9 against another SL 8/9, simply because either player is capable of running rack after rack. Doesn't matter how strong you are, you cant do anything when you aren't at the table, and you can end up taking a loss with your horse and still having to play that SL 1/2. We prefer to offset, have our horse run over a 5/6, and try to match our 1 on a player that wont run racks, (SL 1/2/3/4s). A 1 only has to get 14 balls total, so she is usually capable of getiing to 6-7 balls against these weaker players, which usually ends up netting us around 6-7 points with her loss. Any time you can get those points out of a SL 1, you take it and say thanks. .Different scenarios of course dictate different strategy, but that is our basic strategy heading into the matches..

Nice. Good reasoning. I'm gonna try and remember that, for whenever we can play our 8 again

 

[boyersj]

A lot of good interesting information especially since it is the NTC qualification period. This will be a somewhat long post because I think it is important to share my perspective.

As far as my experience for strategy with high rank player (being a SL7/SL9 myself) is you have to consider the extreme skills - the lowest level can be infinitely low and the highest skill level can be infinitely high - all the rest of your lineup confines within a specific mathematical range.

It is very imperative to make sure you do not need a SL1 (or SL2 in 8ball) to stay a SL1 for your lineup to work - that player being around experience is going to cause them to raise in skill level if they pay even half attention. It is also dangerous to have this person on your team because they will always be considered a heavy liability, even if they get better and go up because your lineup wont work. Teams with a top skill level function much better if they have multiple SL2/SL3 players instead - do not plan on having someone infinitely low to pair with your top player - as it has been mentioned it does no good unless your middle is very strong and a push is all you need.

An example of not having the lowest skill level on a team is my 8 ball team, we have 4 very strong SL5s, in fact two have been SL6s at some point but dropped because they just couldn't hold it. I have a very good SL3, a recently moved up to a 3 from SL2 so that player is on a track of improvement and then we have a SL4 who actually just went up to a SL5 but I expect will be unable to hold it and will quickly drop back to a SL4 but obviously good for that skill level and then myself as a 73% lifetime win percent SL7. Any of my SL5s can beat a SL6, or a SL4. Some of them play down to a SL3 very well while others can lose interest and be clipped. My SL4 is a real wild card, because he can beat anyone or noone and there is very little in between (and why I said he will drop back for SL5). We plan on playing 5-5-3 (or 5-3-5) the first three matches with the idea that if we win one of the 3, we still have 2 very good SL5s left if they have spent their best players. If they haven't it is VERY likely we will be up 2-1, and I will play to close with my "pairmate" being the other SL3. So obviously, flexibility is the key but just as important in elimination matches, is that all of your players are competitive within their skill level. The flexibility comes with having a core of 3 or players and a couple of pairmates to provide flexibility to react within the match, especially important in multi-table formats.

Jude indicated the job of the higher skilled player is closer - and that is a fact, but also that player can be a tide turner as well. If we are down 0-2, if I play it can rally the team and become a win instead of a slow and painful loss. Also worth noting, many times the captains will not want to put their best player against the other teams best player because then you are potentially looking at a coin toss. Obviously an entire season has been played to count on a toin coss match if it can be avoided.

There is no right or wrong answer, a skill to anticipate the opponents plan will go a long way to knowing what to do during the match. I often will take 20 minutes to contemplate their strongest lineup and then who they may want to have matchup. If I like those matchups I will let it happen, but if I dislike them, then I will make sure to prevent, if that requires changing my roster intentions to do so.

 

[Dunnn51]

Its the same everywhere.

I have a Division Championship coming this week ( 8- ball),... and we have LTC's coming a the beginning of the month (9-ball). We have a strong team, but a rookie captain. Rookie capt'n has found out its up to the draw, but ideally its the 3-4's that win the matches not the 7-8-9's. I'll take 3 good S/L 3's everytime, so long as they got good fundies. Figure if 2 out of 3 of them win you have the match.
I HATE IT when our heavy (S/L9) loses and we only get 1 win from the middle. Then its down to the wire, and its all on your S/L 2 .
For that reason, it may be better to save the heavy for the end. Itsa pity you can't play 3 (S/L6's)

 

[Banks]

I have a Division Championship coming this week ( 8- ball),... and we have LTC's coming a the beginning of the month (9-ball). We have a strong team, but a rookie captain. Rookie capt'n has found out its up to the draw, but ideally its the 3-4's that win the matches not the 7-8-9's. I'll take 3 good S/L 3's everytime, so long as they got good fundies. Figure if 2 out of 3 of them win you have the match.
I HATE IT when our heavy (S/L9) loses and we only get 1 win from the middle. Then its down to the wire, and its all on your S/L 2 .
For that reason, it may be better to save the heavy for the end. Itsa pity you can't play 3 (S/L6's)

Eh, I'm not too worried about that last scenario. You can have it the other way, where the 2 loses and the 9 still can't bring it.

This past session, I was 5 of 6 and our 1 was 3 of 9. That comes out to 8 of 15. The previous session, I was again 5 of 6 and our 2 was 1 of 4 - 6 of 10 overall. Imho, it could cancel out, but if I had to take a guess, I'd think that the low 1 takes a worse beating on average than I hand out. I could be wrong, though.

I'll play any s/l. It took me a little while to get over the handicap spread, but now I'm comfortable with it. Unless the person is a weak 7/8/9, they should do alright and need to be able to play anybody.

 

[Dunnn51]

2 "9's " are a dogfight.

Eh, I'm not too worried about that last scenario. You can have it the other way, where the 2 loses and the 9 still can't bring it.

This past session, I was 5 of 6 and our 1 was 3 of 9. That comes out to 8 of 15. The previous session, I was again 5 of 6 and our 2 was 1 of 4 - 6 of 10 overall. Imho, it could cancel out, but if I had to take a guess, I'd think that the low 1 takes a worse beating on average than I hand out. I could be wrong, though.

I'll play any s/l. It took me a little while to get over the handicap spread, but now I'm comfortable with it. Unless the person is a weak 7/8/9, they should do alright and need to be able to play anybody.

I love watching two "9's " duke it out! (at least at our place its all about pride. they still love each other when its over, ) With them, its all about who is gonna miss first. Then the other tries to get the jump, and lay the hammer down. Always fun to watch 'em.
With the 2's at the end,................... well , I try not to pull my hair out! :boring2::frown:

 

[SloMoHolic]

This reminds me of some of my old teams. I am a SL7 in 8-ball (won 78%), and I liked to play every week AND be the captain. That meant I couldn't be on a "normal" team.

I used to partner up with another 6 or 7, and we take on four or five SL2 or SL3 players. They would rotate in and out each week, and the SL6 and SL7 would play every week. My goal was to have fun and teach, and that meant my goal was to break up the team as needed and bring more low SL players into the league.

We would use all available timeouts in order to accomplish the teaching goal. Even I would take a timeout and call the SL2 as a coach, just to give them the opportunity to discuss a situation, and learn how I would decide on a shot selection. I had a blast playing on teams like this for several sessions. We never did well in team rankings, but there are at least a dozen SL5 out there that started as SL2 on my teams.

Anyway, back the the OP, if your team can afford to have your low player get raised, then by all means, pair up the SL2 and SL9, and let them "coach" each other during matches. Before you know it, that SL2 will start moving up.

If your team is running out of handicap points, I would suggest you prepare to split up or swap out some players for the next session.

Of course, if winning your league is the primary goal, my advice may not be as helpful.

For the record, I did also play a few seasons on more evenly distributed teams, where I could only play if our SL2 played. It was pretty frustrating for all of us, but we ended up tied for 17th at National Team Championships in 2007, an experience I'll never forget.

 

[Matt]

In my opinion, higher S/L players and their teams are punished more in APA 9-ball than anywhere else. Accounting for over 1/3 of your allocated S/L points per match, playing an 8 or 9 is usually not worth the impact on your lineup unless they really shoot like an 11 or 12.

As a 9, I am:

• Not likely to blow anyone out. My biggest wins will probably be 14-6.
• Heavily dependent on the break going well, especially without a push out. I have had several matches where hooking myself or my opponent on the breaks made all the difference.
• Susceptible to any low rank (1-4) that's getting the rolls and making a good shot here and there. I had a 2 run 7 balls to beat me last session.
• Susceptible to middle ranks (5-7) that are middle ranks because of their inconsistency. If you're the highest ranking player in a division, people will try to step up their game against you.
• Susceptible to high ranks (8-9) because they can play just as good as I do, or better.
• Going to miss a few shots I intend to make on the way to 75, even when I'm at my best (at least on 9-footers).