Handicaps and your perspectives

J

jackthehat

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I personally do not like HandiCap events. However, these types of events seem to be more prevalent than non-handicaps for an amateur player. Thus, I often compete in them to get the practice and to be involved socially..

I am not a top Handicap player in the events that I enter, however I am fairly close. When I play someone giving me a start I cannot seem to play my real game. Likewise when I give someone else a start I also cannot play my game. On each occasion I do not feel that the winner necessarily deserves the victory.

IMHO the game should be played at levels which is what it was designed for. Boxers don't go into the ring with one hand tied behind their back. If you are not good enough to compete in competitions for the right reasons then don't. Likewise, if you do not want to put in the effort to be a good player and want it all handed down on a plate then don't compete. Is it all about money and attracting entry fees or should it be about like minded people entering a competition in an effort to improve upon their abilities rather than take an unjustified prize?

These are all disgruntled views born out of frustration especially if I have not practiced for a while and come up against a well toned player and have to give a large head start based on history. In this case if the match was on levels I will often deservedly come out on top due to match play experience and often find myself thinking what is going through their mind when celebrating a win as I have never wanted an unfair advantage over someone in any aspect of life.

I can appreciate viewpoints from either side. However, in the case where you have practiced hard to compete in a field of various excellent dedicated players I want to test my true abilities against those who deserve a real game - who wants to see the guy who picks up a cue once a fortnight win outright?

I know this will spurn some judgments but I am interested in understanding them as from my perspective these tournaments only exist in an effort to attract more players and prize money rather than to try and increase a players prowlness.. I am also interested in the mental approach that higher players take when giving a start to lessor players.
 
Last edited:
jackthehat said:
IMHO the game should be played at levels which is what it was designed for. Boxers don't go into the ring with one hand tied behind their back.Nor do bantamweights fight the heavyweights. If you are not good enough to compete in competitions then don't. Likewise, if you do not want to put in the effort to be a good player and want it all handed down on a plate then don't compete.Then stop accepting a handicap, move yourself up or just stop playing in those tournaments. Is it all about money and attracting entry fees or should it be about like minded people entering a competition in an effort to improve upon their abilities rather than take an unjustified prize?If the handicap tournaments are more popular, what do you think? Unjustified prize.. jeez.
Click to expand...

If you can't deal with taking and giving spots, you're going to find a hard time finding a game if you get pretty good. Start your own tournament, using no handicaps, and report back to us in a couple of months.
 
jackthehat said:
I personally do not like HandiCap events. However, these types of events seem to be more prevalent than non-handicaps for an amateur player. Thus, I often compete in them to get the practice and to be involved socially..

I am not a top Handicap player in the events that I enter, however I am fairly close. When I play someone giving me a start I cannot seem to play my game. Likewise when I give someone else a start I also cannot play my game. On each occasion I do not feel that the winner necessarily deserves the victory.

IMHO the game should be played at levels which is what it was designed for. Boxers don't go into the ring with one hand tied behind their back. If you are not good enough to compete in competitions then don't. Likewise, if you do not want to put in the effort to be a good player and want it all handed down on a plate then don't compete. Is it all about money and attracting entry fees or should it be about like minded people entering a competition in an effort to improve upon their abilities rather than take an unjustified prize?

These are all disgruntled views born out of frustration especially if I have not practiced for a while and come up against a well toned player and have to give a large head start based on history. In this case if the match was on levels I will often deservedly come out on top due to match play experience and often find myself thinking what is going through their mind when celebrating a win as I have never wanted an unfair advantage over someone in any aspect of life.

I can appreciate viewpoints from either side. However, in the case where you have practiced hard to compete in a field of various excellent dedicated players I want to test my true abilities against those who deserve a real game - who wants to see the guy who picks up a cue once a fortnight win outright?

I know this will spurn some judgments but I am interested in understanding them as from my perspective these tournaments only exist in an effort to attract more players and prize money.. I am also interested in the mental approach that higher players take when giving a start to lessor players.
Click to expand...

I agree and disagree with some of your statements. What you said about a boxer isn't a very good comparison. If you want to compare to boxing, then make it say someone in the 155 class having to box someone in the the 185 class. Boxing is handicapped by weight class so you are competing against people roughly the same size.

The problem with open events is when you have regular events frequented by several pro players who take all of the money week after week. The average player will play nowhere near their speed no matter how much they practice. They know they are throwing money away so the tournament dies as the field dwindles week after week. Handicaps have a way of making the tournament more fair for all parties involved. Some very strong players think everyone should play even but they don't say that very often when playing someone better than them. Most gambling isn't done straight up. Someone may get a couple games on the wire or whatever.

As for or you last point about mental approach. If you are the better player, you are giving a spot and think they will need every bit of it to beat you. Psychologically they are already behind because someone has told them they can't beat you even and need weight to have a chance.
 
nine_ball6970 said:
I agree and disagree with some of your statements. What you said about a boxer isn't a very good comparison. If you want to compare to boxing, then make it say someone in the 155 class having to box someone in the the 185 class. Boxing is handicapped by weight class so you are competing against people roughly the same size.

The problem with open events is when you have regular events frequented by several pro players who take all of the money week after week. The average player will play nowhere near their speed no matter how much they practice. They know they are throwing money away so the tournament dies as the field dwindles week after week. Handicaps have a way of making the tournament more fair for all parties involved. Some very strong players think everyone should play even but they don't say that very often when playing someone better than them. Most gambling isn't done straight up. Someone may get a couple games on the wire or whatever.

As for or you last point about mental approach. If you are the better player, you are giving a spot and think they will need every bit of it to beat you. Psychologically they are already behind because someone has told them they can't beat you even and need weight to have a chance.
Click to expand...

OK I agree the boxing comparison wasn't the best. But I am only speaking about amateurs and can understand your viewpoint on pros entering. However, to get good I played in many tournaments and was beaten week after weekend thus threw money away but this gave me the positive drive to improve to get to the level I am. Furthermore, from my perspective I would rather lose to better players to keep the inspiration going. Lastly, I agree with your last point that the better player is at a psychological advantage. I just don't see the point of playing and expecting to win if you haven't put in the work. Its like gong on the dole and expecting Government handouts and saying to your wife that you have put in a hard days work.
 
Last edited:
jackthehat said:
OK I agree the boxing comparison wasn't the best. But I am only speaking about amateurs and can understand your viewpoint on pros entering. However, to get good I played in many tournaments and was beaten week after weekend thus threw money away but this gave me the positive drive to improve to get to the level I am. Furthermore, from my perspective I would rather lose to better players to keep the inspiration going. Lastly, I agree with your last point that the better player is at a psychological advantage. I just don't see the point of playing and expecting to win if you haven't put in the work. Its like gong on the dole and expecting Government handouts.
Click to expand...

I could be wrong but I don't think many people go into a handicapped event thinking they have a lock on winning unless they have been sandbagging and don't get caught. That is a separate issue though. When handicaps are set up properly everyone wins about 50% so it is a toss up and the player who is playing to their ability more consistently wins.
 
Banks said:
If you can't deal with taking and giving spots, you're going to find a hard time finding a game if you get pretty good. Start your own tournament, using no handicaps, and report back to us in a couple of months.
Click to expand...

That's a strange answer, which doesn't approach my question from a holistic perspective.
 
DoubleD said:
I know of a weekly wednesday night tourney that draws all levels of players that has been going for over two years. The lowest turnout I have heard of is 16 players. Two weeks ago my buddy told me they had 48 players...with no handicapping.

I've said it before, I've said it in regards to foosball and pool. People don't need a chance to win money, they need to have fun. If you have a tourney and it provides entertainment enough, people will want to play.

I helped run a foosball tourney that gave almost no cash prizes, but cost $50 to enter. Half of the 60-some people came in from over 150miles away. Five people left with any cash prize at all. That tourney was enjoyed by everybody, nobody complained about money or handicaps or anything else, they just had fun.

dld
Click to expand...

Thank you that is a very refreshing story and I wish it could become more prevalent.
 
DoubleD said:
I know of a weekly wednesday night tourney that draws all levels of players that has been going for over two years. The lowest turnout I have heard of is 16 players. Two weeks ago my buddy told me they had 48 players...with no handicapping.

I've said it before, I've said it in regards to foosball and pool. People don't need a chance to win money, they need to have fun. If you have a tourney and it provides entertainment enough, people will want to play.

I helped run a foosball tourney that gave almost no cash prizes, but cost $50 to enter. Half of the 60-some people came in from over 150miles away. Five people left with any cash prize at all. That tourney was enjoyed by everybody, nobody complained about money or handicaps or anything else, they just had fun.

dld
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with that at all. One tournament that went on for a while was a little $3 buy-in, $2 matched and could fill up 30 minutes before the 7pm start time, somewhere around 32 players I think. One tournament (Pub 181) is pretty popular here and gets a large field, I think they handicap it by entry fee(masters $7, A $6 and B $5, I think). Another tournament(or two) is run by another guy that keeps tracks of players and wins. He handicaps the races(race to 2 to start, can get handicapped to need up to 3 more, I think). His tournaments usually had a decent show. There is a demand for it, so that's part of it right there.

jackthehat said:
That's a strange answer, which doesn't approach my question from a holistic perspective.
Click to expand...

Maybe you really didn't ask a question then. Did you just want to hear people agree with you? For a small amount of posts, I took the liberty of looking over them.. and found:

The saying 'you are only as good as the company you keep' has a lot of significance to your question. I personally will not practice with lessor players as a rule. It is not just about playing the table it is about being in the persons presence which can bring you down for all manner of factors. I have always tried to seek out better or equal players. If I cannot find them I will practice alone. It is no challenge consistently beating an inferior opponent and it will subconsciously take the edge off of your game. You will not soar like an eagle if you are surrounded by turkey's.

You're sounding like an elitist, but still below a max handicap after 25 years.
 
A pool tournament is just like any other business: it has to generate enough revenue to pay the bills and have enough profit left over to make the effort worthwhile for the organizer/investor.

So, ask yourself would there be more or less players if the event was non-handicapped? My guess is there would be fewer; probably enough fewer to make the tournament a losing proposition for the organizer.

If you think otherwise, start your own tournament. All it takes is time, money and a lot of work.
 
Ok, I’ll bite. I think handicaps, sandbagging, and divisions for a tournament all end up coming down to a couple/few key points.

I don’t think it’s so much that a tournament IS handicapped but HOW it is handicapped. I think it is next to impossible to accurately/fairly assess someone and handicap correctly. How to tell the difference between a person that is improving considerably because they practice to a person that is already better (and a better sandbag) is not one job of a TD that I envy.

Next, I think the desire for a handicapped or divisional tournament is indirectly proportionate to a person’s skill level. A master level player has likely put the time in to get there, and now is on “even” ground with a lower skill player. Why would the master want to play? Fun, ‘cause it normally isn’t money.

Last, I think they have a place and we need them. Personally, I thought playing well in a handicapped tournament offered the best way to play someone of a higher caliber, gave me a real measuring stick of my game without having to negotiate a spot, etc and play behind the velvet rope.
 
Tournys with no handicaps and entry fees more than 20 bucks will usually go nowhere if they are held in the same locale very often. This is why most all directors have to handicap. I love no handicap tournys, but they are impractical on a local basis.
 
Last edited:
Don't care for Handicaps much. It might be off topic a bit but we find that
in league, the lower teams usually are the ones doing the winning.

They get the maximum handicaps and sure, if you are a strong team, you should be able to over come the lower teams handicap.

What is hard to over come is that along with receiving the max handicap, their 6s start playing like 8s and the 7s start playing like 9s.

That part is a bit hard to over look.

Its got to the point where our team isn't overly interested in playing in the year end tourney.

We had a meeting last week and most of us voted for no handicaps in either the play offs or tourney.

Basically, you run what you bring and if you can't handle it, you're in the wrong division.
 
Last edited:
I think tournaments should be handicapped in the price of entry only. The better players pay more to enter than the lesser players.

For example, where it would cost 100 bucks to enter, let a D or a C player get in for 20 or 30 bucks. That way they have a chance to play better players and it isn't throwing a lot of money away either.
 
I feel that every area is different depending on the competitive attitude of the players in that area.

In my area, players have been getting beat down in weekly bar tournaments by the same 4 or 5 players for 20 plus years. Then when larger tournaments that have entry fees over $5, the average pool player would not participate and it ended up causing the loss of business interest in pool players and tournaments as a whole since the lack of participation.

As much as I was against handicapped tournaments, I have found that they are helping me regenerate a pool scene in my area.

See, I'm one of those 4 or 5 players that has dominated my area for years and at first, the general players thought I was setting tournaments up and running them so I could win. After explaining to them that I dont play in them and I am the TD for them, about half the players wanted to play.

So the first couple of tournaments had a good showing of 32 players at each. A little over a year into doing these tournaments, I'm getting 80 players and having to turn players away.

Another thing has happened, it has created a more competitive attitude amongst a lot of the newer players
and many of the older players have changed attitudes also. So now they are going and playing in more non handicapped larger tournaments.

So are handicapped tournaments good for the game and for the better players? In the area that I live in, Yes.

I do have to add this, I did have to not allow players like Stan Torangue, Dan Louiee, Rich Geiler, etc, from participating due to not being able to handicap it fairly for them, or for their opponents. I mean, having them go to nine and there opponent going to one really wouldn't work.
 
I like the challenge of open events. If I get to play a pro I have to beat him fair and square. If I lose it's ok, I don't want a spot. If I have to have a spot then it takes the fun out of it. If you can't beat someone even, then you need to keep playing until you can. I don't like to feel like something was given to me, I'd rather have to earn it. If I can't earn it, then I didn't deserve it to begin with. Needless to say, I've yet to play in a handicapped event.
 
spot

I'm asking because I'm curious if people think that taking/giving a spot is the same as a handicapped tournament.
 
This subject is a little awkward for me. I never was given a spot when I was learning the game. But I understand how it is attractive to some people.

I guess mainly I don't mind as long as myself and the person I am playing is handicapped accurately. Which is where the problem almost always occurs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top