Fargo Rating Based on Mosconi Cup Performance Only

F

FeelDaShot

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
It would be interesting to see a calculated Fargo Rating based on Mosconi Cup performance only. Mike Page should do this calculation for all players with a significant Mosconi Cup history.

This would offer some valuable perspective for guys like SVB whose Fargo is super high but he plays much much worse during the Mosconi Cup. We need to start treating the Mosconi Cup as it's own discipline. You wouldn't take the best 1-pocket player and assume they are going to be the best rotation player. Not a very good analogy but I think you get the point.

The Mosconi Cup is a very unique event with extreme pressure, excessive noise/sharking, and a whole team aspect that players aren't used to . Some players just handle it better than others. We need to figure out who handles the situation the best and get them on the team. However good or bad they play during the rest of the year is irrelevant.

If SVB plays at a 750 level during the Mosconi Cup, then we should be replacing him with a weaker player who can play above 750 in the Mosconi Cup. SVB dogs it every single year and we keep putting him on the team expecting different results. I've never understood this logic and it's sad watching him go out there and get embarrassed year after year.
 
FeelDaShot said:
It would be interesting to see a calculated Fargo Rating based on Mosconi Cup performance only. Mike Page should do this calculation for all players with a significant Mosconi Cup history.

This would offer some valuable perspective for guys like SVB whose Fargo is super high but he plays much much worse during the Mosconi Cup. We need to start treating the Mosconi Cup as it's own discipline. You wouldn't take the best 1-pocket player and assume they are going to be the best rotation player. Not a very good analogy but I think you get the point.

The Mosconi Cup is a very unique event with extreme pressure, excessive noise/sharking, and a whole team aspect that players aren't used to . Some players just handle it better than others. We need to figure out who handles the situation the best and get them on the team. However good or bad they play during the rest of the year is irrelevant.

If SVB plays at a 750 level during the Mosconi Cup, then we should be replacing him with a weaker player who can play above 750 in the Mosconi Cup. SVB dogs it every single year and we keep putting him on the team expecting different results. I've never understood this logic and it's sad watching him go out there and get embarrassed year after year.
Click to expand...
For six players every year, the Mosconi berth is earned based on performance in Matchroom ranking events. The need to accumulate the points that ensure an automatic berth helps participation levels in both US and Eurotour events, so it is good for pro pool. For the players, a Mosconi berth is worth at least $20,000 and possibly $40,000. When they abandoned this process in 2013, a year in which Matchroom made all ten selections, it resulted in the worst Mosconi event ever, with Europe prevailing 11-2 and the event ending on Day 3.

As for the four invitational spots, it's obviously not a meritocracy, and probably never will be. The Earl pick in 2022 and the Thorpe pick this year evidence that.

The Mosconi has never been about putting together the best possible team. It is about staging an electrifying, but ultimately meaningless, exhibition.
 
Last edited:
Coos Cues said:
You can't score the doubles matches for fargo therefore the data would be somewhat limited and probably wouldn't tell you accurately what you want to know.
Click to expand...
You could, however, compute a TPA for each player of a scotch doubles team, and I don't think translating TPAs to estimated Fargo Rate is beyond the realm of mathematical possibility.
 
sjm said:
The Mosconi has never been about putting together the best possible team. It is about staging an electrifying, but ultimately meaningless, exhibition.
Click to expand...
Meaningless to whom?

Tour players who earn ranking points all year to earn a spot (like Oscar)?

Players on team USA and Europe who would like another 20k in the bank?

Fans who spend money to travel from all over to attend the event (yourself included)?

Matchroom's bottom line?

Fans watching online, pirating streams, and commenting on a 58 page long thread on AZB?

People who are newish to pool who can see how exciting the game can be at peak "hype"?

The contradictions in your post are glaring. It is probably not the right choice of words to call it a meaningless exhibition.
 
An easy way to run the numbers and get a rough idea would be to plug in wins and losses for each player and just use an 800 rating for all opponents. @AtLarge may have historical win-loss records for the players.

I know Mike has done tourney specific ratings before and I assume those are actually accurate, not just a rough idea like I propose.
 
jb444 said:
Meaningless to whom?

Tour players who earn ranking points all year to earn a spot (like Oscar)?

Players on team USA and Europe who would like another 20k in the bank?

Fans who spend money to travel from all over to attend the event (yourself included)?

Matchroom's bottom line?

Fans watching online, pirating streams, and commenting on a 58 page long thread on AZB?

People who are newish to pool who can see how exciting the game can be at peak "hype"?

The contradictions in your post are glaring. It is probably not the right choice of words to call it a meaningless exhibition.
Click to expand...
True, it's more of a joyous, climactic end-of-year exhibition that delivers time and time again as top-notch entertainment. I attend for the party atmosphere that is the Mosconi Cup itself more than for the competition itself.

The event has no rankings implications for either Matchroom or WPA, making it a different kind of event than a serious, world class, tournament.

... I agree with most of what you said and stand corrected. Good post.
 
The whole Shane underperforms at Mosconi does not matter. Who would you replace him with? Hennessy? It makes zero difference. A player that speed will barely win a rack at the Mosconi, let alone a set. If there were 5 players right under Shane's speed that handled the Mosconi better, it might be a valid argument. But there is no one close.
 
iusedtoberich said:
The whole Shane underperforms at Mosconi does not matter. Who would you replace him with? Hennessy? It makes zero difference. A player that speed will barely win a rack at the Mosconi, let alone a set. If there were 5 players right under Shane's speed that handled the Mosconi better, it might be a valid argument. But there is no one close.
Click to expand...
Agree 100%. People need to accept MC for what it IS: a made for tv game show. To use it as some measuring stick of who's the better players is kinda ludicrous. These guys play 99.999999999% of their pool in standard tournament conditions. To use their play in some loud, zany exhibition once a year as a yardstick of their career/ability/record is nuts. I doubt King Willie himself would have played all that great in one of these. He was a quiet, buttoned-down guy who thought 9ball was a gimmick game for chiselers.
 
garczar said:
I doubt King Willie himself would have played all that great in one of these. He was a quiet, buttoned-down guy who thought 9ball was a gimmick game for chiselers.
Click to expand...
Knock 9ball all you want, but it's every bit as stiff a test as straight pool. The great European 9ballers prove time and again that they are much the best at straight pool, too. For example, at the International 14.1, played a couple of weeks ago, the eight quarterfinalists consisted of six Europeans, one American and one Asian. All four semifinalists were European.

Cueing skills are cueing skills and, these days, it's awfully hard to find much evidence suggesting that the greatest 9ballers are any less at ease at straight pool. The great cueists are able to shine at every game played over the green felt, and each game requires a slightly different brand of excellence.

Agreed that the Mosconi is a different bird, but it has proven, time and time again, to offer an accurate assessment of where American pool stands relative to European pool. The European 9ballers have been mass-producing major titles over the past decade, while American players have not.

In my opinion, Willie would have been a world beater playing 9ball in a Mosconi environment.
 
Last edited:
sjm said:
Knock 9ball all you want, but it's every bit as stiff a test as straight pool. The great European 9ballers prove time and again that they are much the best at straight pool, too. For example, at the International 14.1, played a couple of weeks ago, the eight quarterfinalists consisted of six Europeans, one American and one Asian. All four semifinalists were European.

Cueing skills are cueing skills and, these days, it's awfully hard to find much evidence suggesting that the greatest 9ballers are any less at ease at straight pool. The great cueists are able to shine at every game played over the green felt, and each game requires a slightly different brand of excellence.

Agreed that the Mosconi is a different bird, but it has proven, time and time again, to offer an accurate assessment of where American pool stands relative to European pool. The European 9ballers have been mass-producing major titles over the past decade, while American players have not.

In my opinion, Willie would have been a world beater playing 9ball in a Mosconi environment.
Click to expand...
Races to five are akin to playing craps. I'm not knocking 9b i'm just stating what Mosconi often said about the game. He didn't think it had a place in championship pool. I love the game but you can't rate a player's performance in races to five. I don't think Willie would have even played in the current zoo-like conditions. Good chance he would never have allowed his name to be used either.
 
The Mosconi has never been about putting together the best possible team. It is about staging an electrifying, but ultimately meaningless, exhibition.
[/QUOTE]

1733937328244.png
 
garczar said:
Races to five are akin to playing craps. I'm not knocking 9b i'm just stating what Mosconi often said about the game. He didn't think it had a place in championship pool. I love the game but you can't rate a player's performance in races to five. I don't think Willie would have even played in the current zoo-like conditions. Good chance he would never have allowed his name to be used either.
Click to expand...
When people play enough craps, the house edge prevails. There is a lot of variance in a race to 5, but 15-20 races to 5? Much much less.
 
highkarate said:
When people play enough craps, the house edge prevails. There is a lot of variance in a race to 5, but 15-20 races to 5? Much much less.
Click to expand...
Exactly why the USA dominated in the early years and Europe dominated in the later years.

It could have been races to 3 of spot shots for each game win and the results would have been the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top