Honestly rate yourself

Rickw said:
I watched mjantti on a video that he provided a while back and I was impressed with his play. I beleive he was playing 1h. SJM, I tip my hat to you too because if you can play Mika with just a slight spot, you're playing pretty sporty. I'll bet Gremlin would be surprised because from reading some of his posts, he seems to think most of the posters here are not very good. I hope he reads this thread.
Click to expand...


Thanks Rickw for your kind words ! :)

Here's the clip again if anyone is interested:
http://www.hut.fi/u/mjantti/workki/pool/onepocket_mikko_runs7.wmv
 
Going by Billy Bob's system I guess I would put myself as a B player although I've always thought of myself as a C player. I occasionally run back to back racks and have only run 3 racks once which included a combo on the nine, my safety play is strong achieving a full ball snooker probably 80 percent of the time. The only thing I have going for me is my youth, I'm young which gives me lot's of time to improve, I've only been playing nine ball for about a year and am improving constantly.


Chris- would get crushed by Mika :D
 
Celtic said:
Thats an intersting breakdown. We should almost get a test that people can do to test their level against other players. The ghost is one of the greatest challenges.

ATM I play the ghost by breaking, taking ball in hand after the break, and then attempting the run, if I miss I lose the game and rerack and try again. I can almost always beat the ghost in a race to 9 doing this now.

A lesser player could allow for a miss and taking a second ball in hand per each game, lesser then that taking a 3rd bal in hand after a miss. Using the above system it would seem that is a person can be the ghost with ball in hand off the break they are playing close to a A level, a B level player would beat the ghost with ball in hand off the break and a extra ball in hand each game after a miss, and lose normally with the ball in hand off the break and loosing after a miss. The C player would need the initial ball in hand and the 2 extra chances/ball in hands per a rack to beat the ghost. D player, yet another BIH.

The next step I would imagine would be to take the ball in hand away from the break, but that makes it ALOT harder, I would probably have a tougher time beating the ghost then as in at least 1/3rd of the games you are going to have a pretty poor looking table and look at the 1 on average, barring you make it in the side and have to get a decent look at the lowest ball. That initial ball in hand puts you in control of the table, without it you are often required early to make a great shot to get in shape to make the run.

The only problem with systems such as this is that alot of people have trouble playing the ghost, they dont play it like they play another live person, whether better or for worse. All the same the above system would be easy for people to test themselves and see where they stand.
Click to expand...

I like the test idea and here is one I've always used to rate players and it's always been very accurate.

Rack up a rack of 10 Ball, break'em, take ball in hand and start to run out in rotation. You get one point for every ball you legally pocket. Balls made on the break stay down unless you scratch, they spot. 10 ball on the break or combo's on the 10 don't matter or stop the run. You must run out the table to get a score of 10 points for that rack.
All racks end on a miss or foul.
Shoot 10 racks to get a total score. I would say after you've done this drill 5-10 times you'll have a very accurate rating.
Right Now a "C" in Caliornia doesn't have to be a "C" in Vancouver. But If you're a 50 in Cal doing this drill you'll still be a 50 in Vancouver.
I ran a league like this and it was a lot of fun. WE HAD A 99% IMPROVEMENT RATE. Everyone that started the league and finished had improved their average run! Some couldn't stand the pain of finding out their average run was much lower than they liked to believe it was and actually quit. That was fun to see too!!

Joe T 75
 
Joe T said:
Rack up a rack of 10 Ball, break'em, take ball in hand and start to run out in rotation. You get one point for every ball you legally pocket. Balls made on the break stay down unless you scratch, they spot. 10 ball on the break or combo's on the 10 don't matter or stop the run. You must run out the table to get a score of 10 points for that rack.
All racks end on a miss or foul.
Shoot 10 racks to get a total score. I would say after you've done this drill 5-10 times you'll have a very accurate rating.
Right Now a "C" in Caliornia doesn't have to be a "C" in Vancouver. But If you're a 50 in Cal doing this drill you'll still be a 50 in Vancouver.
I ran a league like this and it was a lot of fun. WE HAD A 99% IMPROVEMENT RATE. Everyone that started the league and finished had improved their average run! Some couldn't stand the pain of finding out their average run was much lower than they liked to believe it was and actually quit. That was fun to see too!!

Joe T 75
Click to expand...

That is defintely a great way to guage your progress. I have a sneaky feeling I'm not going to like the initial outcome but who ever said this game was supposed to be easy :-)

Thanks for that info Joe.
 
I saw the categories that Billy Bob listed. Are those official from somewhere or just a estimation of ability?

Using those ratings, I would be a B player with occasional moments of "A". I'm a solid 7 in league play (APA 8 & 9 /TAP 8), but never really understood the A/B/C/D ratings because we don't use them locally. It was interesting to see them defined.

I have no illusions that I can run with the big dogs, but I can hold my own with most players.
 
Gauging one's ability

Billy Bob's, Joe T's and Celtic's methods of gauging a player's skills are interesting. But what about straight pool? Probably all serious players have experience with the game and it is simple to establish each other's ability by simply comparing high runs. Has anyone on this forum run centuries?
 
lewdo26 said:
Probably all serious players have experience with the game and it is simple to establish each other's ability by simply comparing high runs. Has anyone on this forum run centuries?
Click to expand...

Lewdo,
Not so simple - the equipment makes a HUGE difference in the length of the runs. However, 100 ball runners have to be GOOD, no matter the equipment. I have an ongoing debate going on just this subject with some friends - I'll start a new thread tonight when I have time.

I suspect many people play bar boxes, and even the above 9-ball assessment guidelines may be different given the size of the table, and the width of the pockets.
 
I totally agree Willie. That's why I posted in my first post what equipment I was using. I've played on tables that the pros don't like running out on. I played Morro Paez in a tournament on a table that neither one of us could figure out how to run out on.


Williebetmore said:
Lewdo,
Not so simple - the equipment makes a HUGE difference in the length of the runs. However, 100 ball runners have to be GOOD, no matter the equipment. I have an ongoing debate going on just this subject with some friends - I'll start a new thread tonight when I have time.

I suspect many people play bar boxes, and even the above 9-ball assessment guidelines may be different given the size of the table, and the width of the pockets.
Click to expand...
 
lewdo26 said:
Billy Bob's, Joe T's and Celtic's methods of gauging a player's skills are interesting. But what about straight pool? Probably all serious players have experience with the game and it is simple to establish each other's ability by simply comparing high runs. Has anyone on this forum run centuries?
Click to expand...

Not a bad idea but I just thought it would be easier for everyone to go down and shoot 2 or 3 sets of this 10 ball drill and post up their scores then possible we could also watch some of our players progress thru time. Could be an internet tournament in our future.

Plus a high run could have been a fluke (jt132), average run starting with a break shot might be a better gauge but also might not be as much fun as this 10 ball drill.

Joe T
 
Joe T said:
Not a bad idea but I just thought it would be easier for everyone to go down and shoot 2 or 3 sets of this 10 ball drill and post up their scores then possible we could also watch some of our players progress thru time. Could be an internet tournament in our future.

Plus a high run could have been a fluke (jt132), average run starting with a break shot might be a better gauge but also might not be as much fun as this 10 ball drill.

Joe T
Click to expand...

I gauge my game by straight pool as well. I heard a while back that A, B, and C were 100, 50 and 25 respectively. My high run is 30 and in a game to 150 I usually run at least a couple 20+ runs. I think there's just a mental block right now keeping me from being a B level player at this point. I'm hoping my lessons with Mark Wilson coming up next week will help me push through the barrier.
 
I'm a little surprised that no one has mentioned Equal Offense yet as a measure of skill. Because it is not heavy in its demand on 9-ball skills, it probably is not as popular here, but I think Bob Jewett has posted somewhere a chart of how your Equal Offense score reflects your playing ability. While there is still some luck in Equal Offense, there is definitely less than in the 9 and 10 ball games proposed so far.

As you will note, I haven't weighed in on my ability - because I DON'T have a clue. I have a crappy break, rarely break and run racks (prefer a good safety, kicking is getting decent), rarely play 9-ball, almost always play on tough 9 footers. I have stomped some local A players without a single break and run. I always win a few games playing with the pro's. Perhaps shooting ability needs to be separated from the strategic aspect of the games, there are ways to win without always running out (especially on tough equipment, but not against Efren).
 
Another game that brings out several skill factors is Fargo.
I use to play that all the time. My average was over 200 with a 225 for a high. For that kind of average you need to run a rack (or very close) of rotation on occasions.

14 -1 is a good measure as well but Fargo combines rotation and straight pool. The difference, you can play rotation from the very first ball.

I don't think 14-1 is a game that should be played on real tight tables. By tight, not under 4 1/2", that is fine. It will change the game even at 4 1/2". I don't remember the exact pocket size but my friend had an older Brunswick. He had the pockets triple shimmed. Very tight and weird pockets, not to mention c/b rebound near a pocket. I just started playing again after 17 years. I could run some twenties but that was it. Touch a rail and it ain’t going.

I told him to run a high number wasn't likely, from me anyway. I didn't consider such since it had been so long. It wasn't long though and 40's, 50's and 60's come around fairly often for me. The same play on bigger pockets would have been a lot higher. So yes it does make a difference.

How do I play now, so ,so, probably a B + player. If I don’t practice it's not going get any better either. Not a big deal.

Rod
 
I'd guess I'm a c level player

I'll run five or six racks in a night of playing, string a few runs together from time to time.

I've never been part of league that ranks players so who knows how I'd be rated. Know when there are 50 player c tournaments I feel like I can play in them and have a chance, though I can't say I've cashed in them *lol* so maybe I'm a d player after all..
 
mjantti said:
Hey, sjm ! It seems we're both on the same skill level. Surely nowadays I would need a handicap from Mika to beat him but I've done it without a handicap as well.. but quite a few years ago already. I also rarely run more than 3 racks of 9-ball, though in last Finnish ranking-tournament I put a five-pack on my opponent. And just a month ago made 85 in straight pool. Do you play straight pool, sjm ? High run ?

Tell Mika to kick some American butt at the Mosconi Cup (from me) !! :D
Click to expand...

Over the past year, I ran a 91 and an 88. Still, I think my 85 ball run in 2002 on 4 1/2 inch equipment was my greatest run. I don't play straight pool that often anymore, but it really is a wonderful game. Any run over 50 is still enough to get me excited!
 
A pretty good player once told me, "you play somewhere between <a local player who wasn't a very good player> and Buddy [Hall]". I guess I'd have to agree with him! :D
 
I've noticed, I can run 5 to 7 racks of 6ball on a routine basis, which is a joke. Even 3 racks of 7ball, which is also a joke. When it comes to 9ball or 10ball, or rotation, I suck.
 
I like the 10 ball drill personally, fair and easy doesn't take too long to do. I will have to try it tomorrow, does anyone here play the game 99 or 9 innings it's very similar to the 10 ball drill posted.
 
I am told I am a upper B player. In a row I have run three full racks of 15 ball rotation, 3 or 4 racks of 8 ball, 5 racks of 9 ball, over 50 in straight pool, 5 in 3 cushion and won a lot of tournaments. I consider the 3 racks of 15 ball my best achievement. But breaking 50 in straight pool made me the happiest when I finally did it. Had been in the upper 30's and lower 40's so much it was making me sick.
Chris
 
cueman said:
I am told I am a upper B player. In a row I have run three full racks of 15 ball rotation, 3 or 4 racks of 8 ball, 5 racks of 9 ball, over 50 in straight pool, 5 in 3 cushion and won a lot of tournaments. I consider the 3 racks of 15 ball my best achievement. But breaking 50 in straight pool made me the happiest when I finally did it. Had been in the upper 30's and lower 40's so much it was making me sick.
Chris
Click to expand...

Hey Chris,

If you consistently shoot in that range I would consider you an A player. 3 full racks of rotation is exceptional and a high run of 50 ain't so bad either.

Koop
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top