lol... That's the pool-action equivalent of a pick up line
Fargo Ratings on Player Profiles
- Thread starter azhousepro
- Start date
Also be aware that small discrepancies in a player's ratings could be because Mike doesn't keep all his pages that give ratings concurrently updated which results in them showing slightly different ratings for the same players quite often. For example, the top 100 lists on fargorate.com might show different ratings for players than looking them up on fairmatch.fargorate.com or the app does, so depending on exactly when your source of the ratings was last updated (both on your side and the host side), and depending on when whatever source the reporting party is looking at was last updated, there could be a mismatch at any given time and it could stay that way for days.
It would probably be a good idea to ask a reporting party the source they used for the rating they looked at to help narrow down the cause for any discrepancies, particularly if the differences are fairly small. One time Mike mentioned why he doesn't always keep all his pages updated with the correct ratings information but I forgot for sure why, think he said that he just forgets.
Sounds a lot like work to me.
Thanks to the Mikes for making our fun their work
Thanks to the Mikes for making our fun their work
And don't forget thanks to my amazing, lovely, intelligent girlfriend who coded the integration here on AzB.
Platitudes!And don't forget thanks to my amazing, lovely, intelligent girlfriend who coded the integration here on AzB.
Did you get the box of keychains out of the hall yet, lol.
Damn, I said I would get them, didn't I?
I fee ya.
I'm a grown man and I don't need to be reminded every 6mos about that task!
Doesn't this mean as active players increases in skill and a player that took a break from the game and doesn't increase their skill the player not playing potentially ends up with a higher rating ?
If all players are active this wont matter since everyone is getting updated with current matches. But inactive player will report inaccurately until they have a number of new games to update their skill level against.
Am i understanding that correctly ? As long as someone is active their fargo is accurate. However Inactivity creates invalid scores. Could flagging inactive accounts level that field ? Say an account is put on hold for updates if nothing is reported for a year ? Or 2 years ? Not sure average update on fargo participants.
This is basically a non issue. First, when you have a number of opponents, some will go up over the next few years and some will go down. Some will play a lot, and some won't play much at all. Overall they stay pretty close to the same.
You might imagine, though, that if you happened to ONLY play a group of players who were ALL going to log around 1,000 games over next two years in FargoRate, that group might tend to show some rating increase. And if they did, you'd ride along with them whether you played or not.
So let's put some numbers to it. I just found the group of 560 players who both (1) logged between 800 and 1200 games in FargoRate over the last two years, and (2) had at least 800 games in the system at the start of that time. So this is a group of pretty active players. 500 games a year is either a lot of tournaments or one or two league nights and still a number of tournaments. So imagine you played ONLY people from this group two years ago and haven't played since. Turns out your rating would go up 3.6 points per year (7 points total).
If your original rating two years ago was based on 800 recent games, then the uncertainty in your rating would be about 10 points. That is, there is a two thirds chance the rating you see is "right" within 10 points. So here that worst-case scenario in which ALL your opponents continue to play a lot doesn't even lead to a change outside the standard error in your rating in the first place.
Start a BCA league, they're extremely flexible and relatively cheap. And you get access to FargoRate League Management System.
Or he could just start a Fargo 620 and under tournament where you have to have an established FargoRate. Players would start screaming for all the league operators to start submitting to FargoRate lol.
Seriously though, the best way for them to get it done in their area is for all the players who want it to start hounding the league operators about it rather than just crying about it among themselves. Also explain to the league operators the advantages for having it because they may not know (I want to know where I stand compared to people, I want to accurately track my progress over time, I want to be able to run or play in Fargo capped tournaments, I want to be able to match up better, and all the other great reasons people in the area would want to have an accurate FargoRate rating number). The league operators aren't going to do anything until they understand the benefit and especially untl they start to feel like they kind of have to because of the demand for it.
Keep in mind that [outside of the USAPL league which self reports anyway] FargoRate can only accept results from leagues where the play is heads up and matches are not handicapped.
I think the other big reason league operators are resistant to submitting to FargoRate is that they don't want the extra work involved, nor do they even want to do the work to find out what the process is so they would know how much extra work if any would be involved. What Jeff or others could do to help their chances is to find out exactly what all formats and submission methods Mike Page accepts for results (there are a number), and then give that info to the league operators. If possible show them the way (or better yet offer to help do it) that they could change their current match recording formatting so that it would be FargoRate submission compatible, and explain how it really wouldn't be much if any additional work for them to do that and submit to FargoRate, especially after in some cases the initial setup.
Last edited:
Are you sure that's accurate?
Just clarification on a few things. All league data comes in through our league management called FargoRate LMS. Handicapped match formats are fine. There are tons of supported formats with LMS including traditional round robin formats like each of my 5-member team plays a single game against each of your 5-member team. These can be handicapped or unhandicapped. There can be scotch doubles mixed in. There can be league divisions that are just "singles" matchups playing a handicapped or unhandicapped race. 8-Ball can be played with "points" (10-point or 17-point scoring)..... lots of options.
I don't know if things have just changed now, or if we are just meaning different things when we say handicapped. Not that they would obviously ever do it, but you would now accept handicapped APA match results if they decided they wanted to participate? My understanding was that those type of handicapped matches were not usable by FargoRate. What about your local tournament handicapped by A/B/C/D etc where one opponent only has to win 4 games before the other wins 8 games based on the rating the tourney director has given them? Was this always the case?
I also wasn't aware that the LMS was the only way to submit match info to FargoRate now. That was not the case in the past.
For that matter, when ShortBusRuss was inquiring a few weeks ago about getting all their German league matches into FargoRate, I don't recall you saying "the only way to do it is for them to use the FargoRate LMS" which it seems would have been the thing to say if it were that cut and dry, although perhaps you were working on how to get past matches into FargoRate if they would begin using LMS going forward and were trying to work out a deal in the background.
Apparently I'm not completely up to date on all the latest changes. If it is true that outside of BCAPL and USAPL that league and tournament results can only get to FargoRate through LMS at a cost of $20 per year per player, while it is a great business plan for FargoRate, it does indeed make things way tougher in respect to what Jeff was talking about, convincing local league operators and tournament directors (and players for that matter) to want to do it.
You may be right. I was talking about both in my post and still had both on my mind so it may have caused me to misread the response. In any case this is one aspect of FargoRate that seems like it should be much more clear than it is.
You can use LMS or you can go the route of using TPA - which is essentially a direct connection to FR.
I helped start a pool league about a year ago and we tried going the TPA route but for whatever reason we were absolutely refused, frankly, it’s why I have lost all respect for FR (EDIT: as a company, I believe in the numbers and stats) and Mike Page.
EDIT: We had over 500 people in about 8-10 cities in 3-4 state’s ready to join yet we got crickets.
Last edited: