Fargo ratings men vs women
- Thread starter kaznj
- Start date
No and yes.
A lot of what you're seeing is simply a function of the difference in numbers of men vs women who play the game.
A lot of what you're seeing is simply a function of the difference in numbers of men vs women who play the game.
in siming's case she's played against men both in cash games and tournaments. so that should be easy enough to compare
The short answer is yes, they men and women with the same Fargo rating are equally skilled, and it is proven, not conjecture. This is a short video that Mike Page of FargoRate did 8 years ago to address your question of whether a 790 (or any other Fargo rating) woman is the same as a 790 man and that explains how and why they are in fact the same. There are also threads where he has provided additional information and proof that you can find with some searching.
Last edited:
No, because Fargo has no idea if the player is a man or a woman, just a result of some games and matches played. It just shows that woman, for whatever reason, aren't as good on average as the men. It also doesn't matter where you're from, and for the most part what games you're talking about before people start talking about that, which usually happens with Fargo posts LOL.
karen is 710 now. i don't think she was ever at the level of siming chen, chezka or rubilen, whose fargorate are above many very good men players. there's like ten women that would make the top 30 USA list (male and female)
The ONLY possible way is if the women are playing talent as tough as the men. Women usually play other women and its easier to get a higher FR. At a rating as high as 790 they probably would be very close. I know a few gals in the 550-600 range that only play other women and there's NO way they're as good as their male counterparts of the same speed.
Last edited:
This is a misunderstanding.
Fargo's formula doesn't know who the men and women are, it just sees people playing people.
If your argument is just that women aren't usually playing the players with the really high Fargo ratings, I would point out that most men aren't either.
Fargo essentially works like this. There is a guy Adam, who we know through lots of matches between them is twice as good as Bob. And we know through many matches between them that Bob is twice as good as Chris.
Now there is this other guy, David, who we have never seen play, but we know he has never played Adam or Chris. We also know that he has played lots of matches against Bob and plays dead even with him. Even though David has never played Adam or Chris, we can now infer, fairly accurately, that Adam is about twice as good as David, and that David is about twice as good as Chris, same as Bob since he and Bob are even. These are the same kinds of assessments we are making every day in the pool room, or at least anybody who gambles is doing that constantly, Fargo just does it so much more extensively and accurately and with so much more information at its disposal.
Instead of relying on a singular link like above, which is still reasonably accurate, Fargo is comparing you to everybody you have ever played, and then comparing all those people to everybody they have ever played, and so on, so there are ultimately many links between most players. This allows you to gauge a person's rating fairly accurately, even against levels of players they have never played against, because you know how they did against everybody they have played against, and how all those people did against everybody they have ever played against, and so on.
So if we don't just line-up like trained seals and accept everything your algorithm's spit out we're wrong,right? I mean that's what it sounds like. I agree with a lot of what FR does/says but not all. I'm not real big on putting 100% stock in what some computer spits out. No way the FR is without its flaws. Doesn't really matter as i don't play any FR events anyway. I never got a FR established when i was sick and now every event want 3-400 robustness to play. That's never gonna happen.
I disagree. I'm right in that range myself and play both men and women in that range consistently in league and tournaments.
There's absolutely no difference between the two.
Except the women who consider themselves "pros" when they are B players crumble under the heat.
Siming Chen is a 790, she plays like a 790, no matter who her opponent is. She has proven this many times. If not for Covid, and the resulting BS, I think she would have continued up
Ask Donny Mills if you don't believe it. He didn't and I watched him get smoked by Siming Chen at Griff's.