Fargo Delete

[BmoreMoney]

I don't have 'the right' to know your or anyone else's speed. But someone other than me has compiled a resource that gives me your ranking relative to others. I don't have 'the right' to access this information, someone else has given me the privilege to see what they think your ranking is. Why would I not use this free resource, no matter how inaccurate you might argue it is, that is a better piece of information than what I can come up with on my own in the same amount of time?

This is not an exact example but it kinda relates - think back in the day of all of the " old school " pool halls, think about how many fights there were with the " knockers "? Most folks back then sat back, shut up, and let people do their thing. Plenty of times if someone was getting in action with someone and some " guy " was like " oh no, you need at least the 7 ball........ that didn't fly at all, ( unless it was a good buddy of the guy that was about to be raped ). As I said, not a direct correlation , but kinda the same thing only on a much grander scale.....

Edit - I will say this though, Fargo does seem like it wI'll be great for leagues , to help avoid sandbagging - which I believe is the ultimate goal. As in starting their own end all, be all league to replace APA And whatever else leagues. My only thing is I strongly believe there should be an " opt out option " that's all.

 

[jojopiff]

I don't have 'the right' to know your or anyone else's speed. But someone other than me has compiled a resource that gives me your ranking relative to others. I don't have 'the right' to access this information, someone else has given me the privilege to see what they think your ranking is. Why would I not use this free resource, no matter how inaccurate you might argue it is, that is a better piece of information than what I can come up with on my own in the same amount of time?

I never said it was inaccurate or that it doesn't/won't work. It might very well end up being spot on.

Your argument is of the final product, that's not my point. My point is that I don't think this is a needed product. I don't want nor believe there is a need for the product and find the people clamoring for it's existence and the use of it quite baffling.

 

[jasonlaus]

Since the only way FargoRatings can work is by everyone being connected to everyone else if people start opting out then it skews the ratings across the board.

I don't know if any one remembers this but years ago Mike Howerton was asked to post a picture of the tournament winners and one of them, Gary Abood, had put a ski mask on to avoid his face from being shown. Mike was kind of pissed at that as he felt that playing in a public tournament means that you accept the public exposure when you win.

I do think that we will start to see a lot of tournaments that advertise specifically that they don't report to Fargo and don't use FR. I already see that happening in OKC.

Why did he have a ski mask? Lol

 

[cueenvy]

This has been covered but the sample size that Mike says gives an accurate rating is 200 games.

So if a person does well in big tournaments which report to fargo and that compromises 200+ games then that's the speed he plays.

It's not bunk. Maybe not 100% perfect but real world tested against enough results to give probably the best numerical indicator of speed that we have.

An average cannot predict ones optimal or worst performance. Hence my belief that the next time you play for 10k....you are gonna shock the world winning

 

[cueenvy]

What I find most astounding is how many people want to know and think they have a right to know how good everyone plays.

If you're entering a handicapped tournament then fine, aside from that, don't see how it ever should ever matter.

I usually bet 100 to 300 a set for 3 sets....that usually answers the question of how good my opponent is. Better to stay in action than sit in the weeds waiting for a fish. What fun is that?

 

[fastone371]

No, I wasn't even thinking about trying to use Fargo to hustle in any way. I guess what I'm really getting at is while what you initially said is true as far as if someone put the time in to clock someone ( anyone for that matter ) I just do not care for the fact that there is not an " opt out " chance and all who decide to play in ( whatever ) tournament is forced to participate in the Fargo ratings system. It kinda reminds me of the " progressive Snap Shot " that you plug into your cars OBD System - and that being mandatory as opposed to being an option to receive discounts on your car insurance. I; like many others, like options and don't care to be forced to do things.

Fargo requires match information on all players who play in events using Fargo. If I want a Fargo rating and I play 5 opponents in a tournament who wish to opt out of Fargo how do my matches get scored correctly? If you do not want a Fargo rating simply do not enter tournaments that submit info to Fargo, that is the "opt out"

 

[GideonF]

One of the underlying issue in this debate is whether one person's ability to disguise their true speed is something worthy of protection.

Obviously there are those (like the OP) who think that is a good thing for a player to be able to do so. That player can "earn a living" by profiting not only off his skill at the table but also profiting off his ability to know more about his opponent than his opponent knows about him. Some, maybe not all, of those people also think it is okay if the player uses lies or tricks to hide his true ability.

There are others who don't think this is worthy of protection. They may love the fact that people gamble at pool yet cringe to see a shortstop claim they are an APA 4 in order to rob an APA 5.

A side issue, and one I would be curious about, is whether more information will result in less action (as the OP thinks) or whether people will feel more inclined to gamble if they have confidence that they are in a fair game (win or lose) and not being hoodwinked. The fact that people who do know each other's speed really well still gamble with each other suggests to me that more information is not necessarily antithetical to gambling. Of course, I'm not a money player so I could certainly be wrong about that.

 

[BasementDweller]

Fargo Rate will increase gambling -- guaranteed. Forget all the old school matching up via the woofing nonsense. Fargorate will cut all that fat right off the bone. What's left will be good old fashioned male ego. That will fuel more gambling than hustling ever did. Just look at the casinos and the poker tables. People want to know they have a chance to win first. Once they see that they do -- their ego will tell them they are going to be the one leaving with the cash.

 

[pt109]

I'm a big fan of FargoRate.
.....and I'm not going for the "opt-out" nonsense.
Entering a tournament puts your name in the public domain...
....if you don't want to knock your action, don't play.

Although I see a big score being taken down someday....a player invests a few hundred dollars in entries, doesn't beat anybody.....and makes a game for big bucks based on his FargoRating.......there are always hackers for any system.

 

[robsnotes4u]

I don't play to this level, but have heard from some strong players, It is a detriment to them playing in local tourneys.

Because they can't steal?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[robsnotes4u]

I say no. If the tournament or event is public then the results are also public and have been used to rate player speeds anyway.

Any player can opt-out of playing in tournaments to hide their speed. Fargo only takes publicly reported data and runs it through their formula.

Same as any TD does when assigning handicaps only way less mathematically.

I don't see any ethical reason to need to be kept out of the ratings. Nor do I see any practical way that it's possible since a payer opting out has a literal butterfly effect on the rest of the players who are in.

Bingo


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[xplor]

Fargo rate is like that book you kept years a ago
. *Keith McCready* stoots right handed. hand away from body Do not play.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Entering a tournament puts your name in the public domain... ...

That's why I normally enter as "Cesar Morales".

I have heard of players who didn't want their picture taken or their name mentioned after they won a tournament. Usually that's not successful in this day of Faceplant and smarty phones.

 

[lfigueroa]

For you John, this really wouldn't be a concern as you have been about as open and public with you're game as one could be and I TRULY commend you for that along with the heart you showed with the whole Lou thing.

In my experience, stupidity can look a lot like heart.

Lou Figueroa
dat thing

 

[cueenvy]

In my experience, stupidity can look a lot like heart.

Lou Figueroa
dat thing

Why you won't rob him another 20k is beyond my conprehension. Are you just locking up being a winner? You'd be backed anyway. The champion should take on all challengers who post....especially if they have a chicken wing stroke.

 

[fastone371]

Fargo Rate will increase gambling -- guaranteed. Forget all the old school matching up via the wooing nonsense. Fargorate will cut all that fat right off the bone. What's left will be good old fashioned male ego. That will fuel more gambling than hustling ever did. Just look at the casinos and the poker tables. People want to know they have a chance to win first. Once they see that they do -- their ego will tell them they are going to be the one leaving with the cash.

I gotta agree with BasementDweller. As far as people trying to hide their speed so they can steal money by deceiving others, well that just takes a real special kind of person to feel good about themselves for beating someone who is light years below them in skill, even if no money changes hand. Its hard to believe that these special people get an ego boost from behavior like this but whatever works for them I guess.

 

[Prince H]

An average cannot predict ones optimal or worst performance. Hence my belief that the next time you play for 10k....you are gonna shock the world winning

This brings up something I haven't considered. The comment above speaks to the "tightness" around an average within a distribution. To the FargoRate folks, how is standard deviation handled? is that a metric we can expect to see in the future? Does my question even apply? I may need a statistics refresher Thanks!

 

[Bob Jewett]

This brings up something I haven't considered. The comment above speaks to the "tightness" around an average within a distribution. To the FargoRate folks, how is standard deviation handled? is that a metric we can expect to see in the future? Does my question even apply? I may need a statistics refresher Thanks!

If you are wondering about the estimated accuracy of someone's rating, that is kind of indicated by their "robustness" which is roughly the number of games they have recorded. The more games you have played, the less error there will be in your rating. If I didn't get the sums too wrong, if someone has only 100 games in the system, their rating might be off by around 50 rating points, but that depends on the robustness and ratings of their opponents as well. In this case, "might be" means there is roughly one chance in 20 that their rating is off by more than 50 points.

If someone has 5000 games in the system against well-established players of comparable ability, their rating is accurate to about 8 rating points.

This does not take into account major changes in a player's game, as might be caused by illness or an improvement in technique.

 

[Prince H]

If you are wondering about the estimated accuracy of someone's rating...

No, I understand the robustness and how the sample size for any given player impacts the accuracy and reliability of the rating.

I was responding to a comment regarding how an average isn't an indicator of a players best or worst speed. The comment by cueenvy implied that if a player has, for example, a 700 rating, the player may have some days where they play like a 750 and other days where they play like a 650. And maybe there is another player who is also a 700, but has days where they play like a 710 and others where they play like a 690; implying that two equally ranked players have different top gears, but one player is more consistent. This is what i mean by standard deviation; one player deviates from his "average" by 50 points and another player deviates by 10 points.

But when i think about how the FargoRate is calculated, i'm not sure if the above thinking applies, as it might not be an average in the classic sense of the word....I'm looking for some clarification and if any deviation data does exist I would be interested in it

 

[Bob Jewett]

... I was responding to a comment regarding how an average isn't an indicator of a players best or worst speed. The comment by cueenvy implied that if a player has, for example, a 700 rating, the player may have some days where they play like a 750 and other days where they play like a 650. And maybe there is another player who is also a 700, but has days where they play like a 710 and others where they play like a 690; implying that two equally ranked players have different top gears, but one player is more consistent. This is what i mean by standard deviation; one player deviates from his "average" by 50 points and another player deviates by 10 points. ...

In a previous post I referred to this as the player's "beta" which is kind of comparable to the beta of a stock which says how much it varies compared to the market. A player with a high beta would tend to post a lot of lopsided matches, both wins and losses.

The main problem I see with trying to measure a player's beta is that any single match or even a few matches doesn't give enough info. Matches between nearly equal top players can result in 9-2 sometimes with a few rolls being the difference. If you looked at a lot of matches, maybe you could see symptoms of a Jekyll/Hyde problem.