Once again read what I was responding to.
FargoRate: Is an Arizona 600 better than a 600 elsewhere?
- Thread starter mikepage
- Start date
Siming won two sets.
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
I've had nights where I was unstoppable, at least by the players that were there that evening. I wasn't even shooting my best, maybe a a bit above my average. But the games just went my way. I've had other nights where I was shooting pretty darn well but the games just wouldn't go my way. I couldn't get a win against the same group of players.
If you have the break and the runout, what else do you need? Yeah, if there's a hiccup in either one, you are dead in the water. I need to be more strategic instead of trying to shoot my way through any obstacles, but it's so much fun when it works.
What if I was kidnapped by aliens and they implanted brain patterns from all of the top players ever into me and then sent me back home so I overnight have the skills of Efren, Earl and Shane but I'm still a 550 the next day? I mean, you can find a flaw in everything if you come up with enough oddities outside of the norm.
Newer games have more weight towards the ranking then older ones, so this basement pro will catch up to his true rating sooner rather than later. And someone can also just contact Fargo Rate and say "hey, this guy is killing people as a 525 playing other 525s he should be manually adjusted".
First ,I am a fan of fargorate.
I only listed a couple problems I have with it. My examples are very plausible- no aliens.
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
That was a good question about Fargorate lagging behind changing skills. I actually had a pretty good night at a tournament and my Fargo went down. I don't have a lot of games in the system, I'm guessing a strong showing aged into a lower weighted range but a few dogs were still heavily weighted. It jumped up a week later, above the previous rating, so I'm guessing that it was a peculiarity of games being entered into the system at different times. For that matter, my rating isn't going to get me selected for the Mosconi cup, or even impress anyone, so I don't mind being slightly underrated (due to improving skills and a weak robustness, not a flaw in the ratings).
One thing I haven't heard mentioned is the effect of the other players on performance. I'll play dead even with someone 100 points lower and then turn around and play 100 points above my rating against a player 200 points above me. I know SVB would whip me but I'd still play the best pool of my life.
Impressive. She also played SVB tight matches as well if I recall and perhaps even won 1 or 2 if I recall
I have never shot a tournament, but was given a fargo rate by one of my league operators a few years back. He did that when my wife needed a starting fargo rate as she wanted to start shooting some tournaments with some of her friends. I guess he thought we both were going to shoot so he gave us both a starting rating. It was easy for him to do as other shooters in our league, and another league he ran, and who regularly shot tournaments, had league averages similar to both of us.
I looked up the fargo rating of another player on our league that had an almost identical league average as me, and the fargo he gave me matched up, all was how it should be.
Fast forward about 3 years, never have shot a tournament, but my fargo has dropped over 100 points, yet my league shooting has gotten better.
I get occasional offers to shoot with friends to shoot in this tmt or that. I have an idea what my true fargo should be as I know what fargo other similar league players have, and would be totally honest with a tournament operator when registering, as a realistic fargo for me now is about 200 points higher than listed.
While I would like to start shooting some tournaments, it's really tough in my case as my wife has become quite involved with her friends in shooting tournaments, and we have a dog at home that needs to go out every 5 hrs or so, and because of this, if I shoot, my wife can't, and I don't want to have her miss out on what she has.
I'm sure there is reasoning for it, but fail to understand how my fargo could drop so much just because of not shooting.
I looked up the fargo rating of another player on our league that had an almost identical league average as me, and the fargo he gave me matched up, all was how it should be.
Fast forward about 3 years, never have shot a tournament, but my fargo has dropped over 100 points, yet my league shooting has gotten better.
I get occasional offers to shoot with friends to shoot in this tmt or that. I have an idea what my true fargo should be as I know what fargo other similar league players have, and would be totally honest with a tournament operator when registering, as a realistic fargo for me now is about 200 points higher than listed.
While I would like to start shooting some tournaments, it's really tough in my case as my wife has become quite involved with her friends in shooting tournaments, and we have a dog at home that needs to go out every 5 hrs or so, and because of this, if I shoot, my wife can't, and I don't want to have her miss out on what she has.
I'm sure there is reasoning for it, but fail to understand how my fargo could drop so much just because of not shooting.
First of all WHO wears the pants in that family???
JUST KIDDING
It's great you take care of a dog that needs some extra care.
As for Fargo if you have no games in the system , you could be reassigned a.preliminary # and your results would immediate change your # anyways.(assuming your assessment of your real Fargo # is correct)
JUST KIDDING
It's great you take care of a dog that needs some extra care.
As for Fargo if you have no games in the system , you could be reassigned a.preliminary # and your results would immediate change your # anyways.(assuming your assessment of your real Fargo # is correct)
Ya, I get accused of that at league sometimes. I just smile, wife really enjoys shooting with her girlfriends, and that's fine with me. She never complains about anything I do.
I just bought a new boat last month, well over 100k, and never talked to her 1st about it. It was funny actually, as one of her friends came over to shoot some pool with us and while we were shooting the dealer called to finalize a few things, and I told him fine let's go with it. When I put the phone down, her and her friend looked over at me and my wife said, did you just buy a new boat? I just smiled and she said to our friend, looks like we just bought a new boat. She loves to fish also, so that helps.
As to a good fargo rating starting out, it is quite easy as most of our league players shoot fargo rated tournaments regularly, and we have over 70 players to get an estimate from.
I just bought a new boat last month, well over 100k, and never talked to her 1st about it. It was funny actually, as one of her friends came over to shoot some pool with us and while we were shooting the dealer called to finalize a few things, and I told him fine let's go with it. When I put the phone down, her and her friend looked over at me and my wife said, did you just buy a new boat? I just smiled and she said to our friend, looks like we just bought a new boat. She loves to fish also, so that helps.
As to a good fargo rating starting out, it is quite easy as most of our league players shoot fargo rated tournaments regularly, and we have over 70 players to get an estimate from.
Sure, but that is the same problem you would have with ANY handicapping systems that does not know about the person it's trying to handicap. Someone secretly getting better is the same thing as a totally new player, no way to know what they can do till they do it.
Really the only thing handicapping systems need is good data and honest players to fill that data. By far the biggest issue is the players and second is the people responsible for the ratings not taking good enough action to deal with the cheaters.
In your example of a player getting better without anyone knowing it, all he has to do is tell the tournament director "so I am a 525 here but I actually got better so you should put me in as a 575" and no more issues. It's similar to that line we hear "all it takes for evil to prosper is for good people to do nothing", and that applies as much to leagues as it does to world events.
There is a chapter in a famous Greek philosopher and his teachings in a book I read that dealt with morals and "good" in society, basically he said that it's very easy to go through life pretending to be good while being sneaky and harder for those that are good and moral even when no-one is watching or keeping tabs on you. Say if one person always calls a foul on themselves and the other shooter tries to hide them. Or if one person is honest about his skill and another tries to hide it. One just appears to be what they are, while the other person actually IS what they are. That translates to politics, business, really anything, whoever is not honest tends to have the advantage over those that are, and that type of thing is actually a big part of why we need so many laws and regulations. If everyone did things for the greater good or what is "right" then we can get by with like a 4 page law-book. In our society we tend to call the honest people "naive" or "simpletons", which I think is pretty sad.
Last edited:
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
If a guy puts in the work, let him reap the reward, assuming that his initial rating was correct. I play a couple of under 600 tournaments, at that level, assuming an accurate rating to start with, I don't think a massive rating jump is realistic. It might be different if a lower rated player is getting games on the wire. I can see that a player making a massive improvement could game the system but I don't see it being a big problem. If a guy is really that much better than his handicap, the the tournament director can step in.
Coos Cues
Coos Cues
I think he's talking about the people who say things like "I don't have a table at home like you do". While driving a brand new truck and yours is 20 years old.
We all make choices in life and those who choose a path that makes them better at pool don't owe games to those who chose otherwise just so everyone can get a trophy. Or to people who actually put in more time than us at the table competing yet refuse to honestly address their fundamental shortcomings. They would never consider spending $1000 for some training but own $2000 cues. So they have the same gross shortcomings in their game year after year even though pool is their main hobby. We all know these folks.
Of course handicapped events aren't designed by those putting them on to have lower rated players win, just to get their delusional money in the pot. If they do win so be it but that's not the goal. So in that regard it's the best compromise.
I had that experience with the handicap system in use in the '80s and 90s. They had me rated at 55 but I played even with 3 local players that were in the 90-100 range. I even beat a 130 in a 9 ball race to 7 on 9' gold crowns. So I played as a 75. Still didn't do any good.
Zero on the rating system doesn't mean "none." Think of a number line that keeps going in both directions.
The way to think of the ratings is to look at rating DIFFERENCES.
Think of how badly Gorst beats a 530 player
If you find a player that gets beat similarly by a player rated 200, that player would be -100 (300 points below.)
boogieman
It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that ping.
That makes sense, thanks!
also players coming in from cue disciplines not covered by fargo. pyramid, chinese 8b, snooker etc
That is where you hope their preliminary starting # is accurate.
Had to look and Judd Trump is a 742 with 69 games in the system. I would think he would start at 750. That's is above bca Vegas but under most of the top pros at 780 to what 830?
Last edited: