GP on a bad team, BP player on a good team

Pangit

Banned
GP on a bad team, BP on a good team

What's worse...League wise? I'm talking from memory. I don't play "league", too many people to blame, especially amongst "serious" amateurs.

I'd rather hoe my own row.
 
Last edited:
What's worse...League wise? I'm talking from memory. I don't play "league", too many people to blame, especially amongst "serious" amateurs.

I'd rather hoe my own row.

Bad player on a good team is worse. Everyone on the team is unhappy.

Good player on a bad is team is better because the other players are appreciative of the good player.
 
I kinda hate team leagues cause of the drama . I found a single players pool league i hope it turns out better.
 
Bad player on a good team ? It worked for us, he wasn't "terrible", he just wasn't of the caliber that the rest of us were... He was a banger. No position skills, really.
That being said, some of the shots he would actually pull off were unreal !! Shots that the rest of us would never DREAM of, and this kid would call and make it !! Who the hell shoots a three-ball combo when they can play the object ball off the back of another ball to sink it ??
It was a BCA league, so coaching wasn't an option. But he usually went up early in each round (in case the rest of us needed to 'pick him up'), and very rarely did he ever close a round.
One of the other benefits was that it kept the team average low. And as long as he was making balls every game, it only helped us overall...
 
Playing league is bad enough and considering how much time you spend sitting, watching and waiting to play, I'd much rather have good players to watch. Watching a team full of hackers makes me want to poke my eyes out with the cue.
 
I think it's better to be the worst player on the team. If you're the best player, everyone will be riding on you for advice, to carry the team, etc. And sitting watching teammates screw around can be very frustrating when you have no one else to rely on for solid play. As the worst player, you're there to keep the total handicap in line, shoot, have fun, learn some stuff, and if you win it is gravy. There's no real down side to it.


Watching a team full of hackers makes me want to poke my eyes out with the cue.

This also.
 
Hackers?

Playing league is bad enough and considering how much time you spend sitting, watching and waiting to play, I'd much rather have good players to watch. Watching a team full of hackers makes me want to poke my eyes out with the cue.

Not all of the 200,000 + teams that play in pool leagues are "full of hackers". I've had at least six teammates who scored $10,000 or more in gambling sessions. Also, I find that time "sitting and watching" can be a valuable learning process, - learning what to do AND what NOT to do...

I like team play for a number of reasons: sharing success with friends, taking teams to national events, winning money, and maybe most importantly, the experience of COOPERATION as well as COMPETITION.

I do agree that watching hackers with no interest in improving their game is not fun...

Donny L
PBIA/ACS Instructor
Gainesville, Fl
 
Not all of the 200,000 + teams that play in pool leagues are "full of hackers". I've had at least six teammates who scored $10,000 or more in gambling sessions. Also, I find that time "sitting and watching" can be a valuable learning process, - learning what to do AND what NOT to do...

I like team play for a number of reasons: sharing success with friends, taking teams to national events, winning money, and maybe most importantly, the experience of COOPERATION as well as COMPETITION.

I do agree that watching hackers with no interest in improving their game is not fun...

Donny L
PBIA/ACS Instructor
Gainesville, Fl

I agree completely Donny, I was the same way for many years and have been lucky enough to play on some amazing teams over the years including a win and a second at the VNEA nationals. With that said, there just comes a time when the allure of league disappears and the idea of playing with a bad team just isn't appealing at all.

I love the team atmosphere but the masters team divisions at both BCA and VNEA have been terrible for far too long, nothing worse than working for a full season and going to Vegas to find almost no teams and no prize money. I'd rather save the league money and travel to the USBTC or the derby where the competition is best.

My favorite memory of league pool wasn't winning my charlies, it was finishing 2nd in the speed pool one year...if league could capture that excitement they'd have me forever.
 
Team nationals

I agree completely Donny, I was the same way for many years and have been lucky enough to play on some amazing teams over the years including a win and a second at the VNEA nationals. With that said, there just comes a time when the allure of league disappears and the idea of playing with a bad team just isn't appealing at all.

I love the team atmosphere but the masters team divisions at both BCA and VNEA have been terrible for far too long, nothing worse than working for a full season and going to Vegas to find almost no teams and no prize money. I'd rather save the league money and travel to the USBTC or the derby where the competition is best.

My favorite memory of league pool wasn't winning my charlies, it was finishing 2nd in the speed pool one year...if league could capture that excitement they'd have me forever.

Seems we've had similar experiences. I really enjoyed going to NPBA nationals in the '70s, VNEA in the '80s, and BCA in the '90s. I did have a few negative experiences with each, but haven't played in a national event since 1995, so I can't speak to recent events.

Getting back to the original post question...I had a 191 average on a bowling team when I was a teenager, and my four teammates averaged 152-159. Fun, but we finished sixth out of ten teams. In '86, I was the fourth best of six on the defending champ VNEA team. Now that was fun!

Donny L
PBIA/ACS Instructor
Gainesville, Fl
 
I have been on the same team for over 10 years (BCA). We go to Vegas every year. Some had to move away for work, but the core of 3 has been there the entire time. We are very competitive, but really, we are there to have fun. We look more at how a good player will fit in personality wise when it comes to filling an open slot. We will take a fair player that fits in nicely VS a really good player with the personality of a rock.

If the fair player is willing to keep an open mind and learn, he can become better very quickly as proved by one one member of our current team. He was pretty awful when we took him on as an alternate last year, but now, he is a regular player (no longer an alternate) and plays pretty sporty. We have a ton of fun meeting every week. Someone always come up with some stupid funny shit. All of the teams we play enjoy playing us (even when we torture them) because we all have a good time. No arguments, no getting pissed, no getting drunk and belligerent, NO DRAMA, just a lot of fun. Even when we are on the recieving end of the ass whoppin we are throwing jabs at each other in good fun and having some laughs.

There are other teams in the league that are quite serious though, and honestly, even though they may have better players, they don't have near the fun we have. I wouldn't trade it for first place. I'll keep taking those 2nd and 3rd and 4th places for all the fun we have. When pool stops being fun and entertaining, and becomes too serious, I'll hang up my cue. Eveyone on the team has a really good day job, so it isn't like we need the cash.....it's about getting together, having some laughs, all the while being competitive..
 
I think it's better to be the worst player on the team. If you're the best player, everyone will be riding on you for advice, to carry the team, etc.

^This^

I have been on both sides of the fence and when you are the best player on a weaker team the team basically expects you to dominate and if you do not the entire team folds all around you as often as not.

As a percieved weaker player on a team it takes alot of the pressure off, noone "expects" you to win 5/5 every match and if you shoot not so hot one match the rest of the team can pick you up. It is also way cooler to play great on a good team where you are not "expected" you to be the strongest player in a match or two instead of playing great on a weak team where they expected it so it is not much of a thing.

The best teams for everyone on the team are the teams where all of the players are pretty close to the same level of skill.
 
What's worse...League wise? I'm talking from memory. I don't play "league", too many people to blame, especially amongst "serious" amateurs.

I'd rather hoe my own row.

There are pros and cons to each; however, I would love to be the worst player on a great team.

One of the problems with being the best player on a medium team is that you are always expected to win. And you are generally playing the best player on the other team, as well. Therefore, nobody remembers why you didn't win (the other player shot great), your team just remembers that you lost...lol.

Whereas, if I am the worse player on a good team, I get to play the worst player on the other team. Based on my experience, I will win that match about 90% of the time. Therefore, I would love to be the worst player on a good team.

Note; I am talking about APA Master format since that is what I play; however, I think it probably relates to other formats as well, except for the race format.
 
Back
Top