Illegal team takes 3rd in Gold at BCA Nationals

[hang-the-9]

Yes, this is exactly what kept me from playing singles this year. I'm rated a ~664, I played the platinum division last year not knowing where the cut off was. I finished in the money, but was very outclassed by a bunch of people. So I knew this year that I had no chance of winning the platinum, and I would have to compete at a higher level for less money pay out? Doesn't make sense.

Combine the division and issue handicaps. Its the only way I'll play singles again.

So the odd thing is that everyone seems to complain that handicaps ruined pool, step up and play, I don't ask for spots, yet the there are big long threads where people want MORE handicaps LOL

There is a higher level than Platinum? A 664 is a very good player, solid A or A+. At that point there is not much need for handicaps on a 7 footer.

 

[Adam Tetzlaff]

Why would someone make up, and lie about the 500 point error on one of the players rating, during registration? Would a team really lie about something like this to try to get another team in trouble? It does sound unbelievable though (a 500 point error, from 640 down to 140).

Because for some people, excuses need to be made for why they didn't win. Sounds like they were salty that they lost. Makes for good gossip though.

 

[JohnnyOzone]

If all singles was one bracket w/ games-on-the-wire handicaps, and if the handicaps were legit to the point that whoever won the match played well (FOR THEM), then if you had a final match and one of the players was a 525 and the other player was a 700, and the 525 played well and the 700 made some unforced errors, and the 525 won, what do you think the 700 would say?


SANDBAGGER!!!!!!

 

[FastManners]

The Old System

Personally, I hate the idea of handicaps. It should have been kept to the old divisions of Trophy, Open, Advanced, Masters, Grand Masters. When you cash at a certain level you move up a division. If you continually fail (say for 2/3 years) to cash you move down.
What the Fargo rating system has changed, is that players can now play for years and still have zero chance in their division, which basically means that they are donating every year. You will get players such as myself who are at the low end of platinum and who barely cashed in the Open every year, deciding that the BCAPL is no longer worth it. Especially if they are going to move my team up to Platinum a week before the tournament, because of some flawed info found on Google (and not sticking to their own rules on their own site).
From my experience, the Fargo Starter ratings are based on someone Googling players and making assumptions. These Starter ratings can be changed at any point up until the start of the tournament and players/teams moved into a division accordingly.
This Google research holds more stock than BCA Nationals past results and Local BCA league results.

As you can tell, I am still bitter and twisted at my teams treatment by the BCAPL...... lol

 

[5aheadforpinks]

If all singles was one bracket w/ games-on-the-wire handicaps, and if the handicaps were legit to the point that whoever won the match played well (FOR THEM), then if you had a final match and one of the players was a 525 and the other player was a 700, and the 525 played well and the 700 made some unforced errors, and the 525 won, what do you think the 700 would say?


SANDBAGGER!!!!!!

First off, after 200 tournament games logged why would anyone throw that much money away to sandbag one tournament? I'm talking established (200+ games) players only.
If you put those ratings in the FargoRate game matcher, you will see that the 525 has a 2.3% chance of winning an even race to 6 against a 700. Why would he ever enter the same event?

I'm arguing that we are already handicapping the tournament by making different divisions (platinum, gold, etc.) but the playing ability within each division is still too far away from each other. Example, a 710 vs 625: in a race to 6 the 625 has a 16% chance to win. Another example, a 624 vs 525 in a race to 5 the 525 has a 14.7% chance to win.

 

[PoppaSaun]

When you cash at a certain level you move up a division. If you continually fail (say for 2/3 years) to cash you move down.

This is such a stupid idea, and it seems to always pop up.

I have seen this in action, at my local foosball tourney scene. There was a guy who won ~half of the tourneys he entered as a 'B' in our A/B/C format. He was the best 'B' player in any of the tourneys, not by a ton, but he definitely had an edge on everyone else in that group.

So, a bunch of whiners complained and put the 'win and move up' rule into effect. This guy never went more than three matches (double-elimination) in when playing as an 'A'. After a bunch of these tourneys they moved him back to a 'B' and he won again, so they moved him back to an 'A'...and he quit playing.

As an aside, during that time there were 'B' players who legitimately improved and leap-frogged this guy. He had been playing for 25 years and just wasn't ever going to get better.

I always had the attitude that there is a 'best' of any skill group. That doesn't mean that the guy belongs in the next skill group, just like the worst pro is still a pro, the best amateur is still an amateur.

 

[mikepage]

First off, after 200 tournament games logged why would anyone throw that much money away to sandbag one tournament? I'm talking established (200+ games) players only.
If you put those ratings in the FargoRate game matcher, you will see that the 525 has a 2.3% chance of winning an even race to 6 against a 700. Why would he ever enter the same event?

I'm arguing that we are already handicapping the tournament by making different divisions (platinum, gold, etc.) but the playing ability within each division is still too far away from each other. Example, a 710 vs 625: in a race to 6 the 625 has a 16% chance to win. Another example, a 624 vs 525 in a race to 5 the 525 has a 14.7% chance to win.

We have to put a rating range of 100 points or so within a tournament in context. Most tournaments have more like a 300-point range

When a tournament has players between, say 500 and 600 evenly distributed, it is true that the weakest player is 100 points away from the strongest player.

But it is also true that when you do the draw, the average gap between the players is more like 30 points.

 

[JC]

We have to put a rating range of 100 points or so within a tournament in context. Most tournaments have more like a 300-point range

When a tournament has players between, say 500 and 600 evenly distributed, it is true that the weakest player is 100 points away from the strongest player.

But it is also true that when you do the draw, the average gap between the players is more like 30 points.

IMO the single biggest thing holding back Fargorate is the shortcomings of LMS.

Until that is addressed and is available for BCAPL league use everywhere there will be serious discrepancies between players ratings and their actual ability. This is especially true in the sub 600 crowd that isn't out playing tournaments every weekend.

You simply cannot exclude 90% of the eligible games being played out there from the system and expect accurate results any time soon.

Fix and finish LMS and behold the true beauty of Fargorate unfold.

JC

 

[jojopiff]

We have to put a rating range of 100 points or so within a tournament in context. Most tournaments have more like a 300-point range

When a tournament has players between, say 500 and 600 evenly distributed, it is true that the weakest player is 100 points away from the strongest player.

But it is also true that when you do the draw, the average gap between the players is more like 30 points.

Disregard. I mis-read your statement.

 

[FastManners]

This is such a stupid idea, and it seems to always pop up.

I have seen this in action, at my local foosball tourney scene. There was a guy who won ~half of the tourneys he entered as a 'B' in our A/B/C format. He was the best 'B' player in any of the tourneys, not by a ton, but he definitely had an edge on everyone else in that group.

So, a bunch of whiners complained and put the 'win and move up' rule into effect. This guy never went more than three matches (double-elimination) in when playing as an 'A'. After a bunch of these tourneys they moved him back to a 'B' and he won again, so they moved him back to an 'A'...and he quit playing.

As an aside, during that time there were 'B' players who legitimately improved and leap-frogged this guy. He had been playing for 25 years and just wasn't ever going to get better.

I always had the attitude that there is a 'best' of any skill group. That doesn't mean that the guy belongs in the next skill group, just like the worst pro is still a pro, the best amateur is still an amateur.

Eloquent respone.

It was actually a method that worked well for many many years. Failing would not be winning the tournament that would be insane in a field of 1,000+. It would be failing to win a match after a few years and then only moved down by request. There is no perfect format, but the current set up is so much worse than the how it used to be run.

 

[skeeterpro]

Fargorate

My event experience

I played platinum singles and platinum teams. Finished 49th in singles and 5th in teams..

I thank the BCA and all those involved for putting on an event that I am sue has more moving parts than most of us can imagine. That said I think some things could be better especially with Fargo Ratings.

No handicapping system is perfect but if your going to use it then use it 100%. That and hold people accountable. If I was rated 525 by mistake instead of the 666 I went in with i would know its wrong and i should say something. There were a few people there that knowing should have questioned things but did not. I hope they are held accountable.

Singles-
This is a very tough division for me as I play one day per week and feel I am a bit over rated. I dont understand why my league matches were not counted and I had a large change in rating a few months before the event. I am just in a weird position that I can not regularly play with the player levels that beat me.
First loss was to Chris Calabrese who represented his country of Australia in the World Cup of Pool. The one where we send guys like SvB. Nice guy but he was rated 20 points or so lower than me and now is rated 20 points higher. I then lost out one spot from the money to Brian Begay. Strong player that is now a 699. Our first 5 games consisted of him having 3 BnRs on his breaks and me breaking dry and him running out on his. He and Chris were both nice guys but I think it will be tough for me to cash (not win) in a tournament where I am going to run into these guys regularly.

Teams we finished 5th after a disappointing set against a team from Australia. We might have been a bit tight after being told they were all underrated. We knew Chris and his brother Vinnie Calabrese. Vinnie played on the pro snooker tournament and we had watched as he and his well underrated partner robbed a scotch doubles event. Vinnie was a 691 which surprised me and a friend that knows him and his team. He is now a 736

All of heir team went up and one player on there team Danny Stone really impressed me. Even with his ratings increase he is still under where he plays. good player.
The team was the nicest team we played and they all seemed like really good guys. i just think somewhere in there the ratings were off. not sure if the new ratings put them over the limit or if a 736 can play or not.

They had a ton of robustness so I am not sure how that works.

Our team came in at the limit exactly. 3250 .. I felt we had 4 over rated and one under rated by a little bit but not really sure how much. What surprises me is that our league matches are not entered and our robustness doesnt seem to match actual playing. One of our guys didnt move and still shows 0 robustness after playing two years with us in Vegas plus league.

The scotch doubles with Vinnie and Joey Tohme perplexed me a lot. Vinnie was a 691 and she played as a 400 with no robustness. She now is listed with a starter rating of 500 after it said 400. She is 527 and Vinnie is now 736. That is a huge difference. we watched the finals that last about 20 minutes where they won 4-0.

Joey had a great week and Vinnie went on to finish 5th in the US Open 8 Ball. Actually most of their platinum 8 ball team had good events at the Us Open 8ball. They ran into each other a few times.

Nothing is perfect but I left vegas feeling like I would not be back s I just do not play enough and or well enough to compete with correctly rated players and those that slip in. Now that I am back and decompressed I really would like a couple matches back and think I would play singles or teams again. However in teams I would want to play on a gold team.

i do not know if money is added to events or not but I was surprised when I saw out of the $500 entry for teams that $300 goes to the event. Entry for singles was $160 and I think it was $115 that goes to the event but i am not sure.

I would like to see Fargo ratings succeed and I wonder what has to be done to get more games turned in. Why wasn't league matches for a year turned in or rather were they taken out?

I know nothing about the two teams in the platinum finals but they must have been strong teams. I am going to see if I can watch the matches if they were streamed.

I played in the Scotch event with Vinnie and Joey, they rolled right through the tournament with very few games lost. It was brought to the attention of the tourn director by quite a few teams that this team was clearly under rated but guess what, even under a watchful eye they were allowed to play and took home 1st place cash. It may be unfair for many players that only play once a week and the tournament would probably suffer but IMO, all players should have an established Fargo Rating before they are eligible to play in the national tournament. Too many players are slipping through the cracks and taking home big payouts before it's discovered that they're playing at a much higher level than indicated. Joey Tohme comes into the event with a 400 rating with ZERO games in the system and leaves the tournament with a 527 WTF??? She blew through the silver singles division with hardly a single game lost in the entire event. Her well under rated Fargo rating enabled her to take home 1st place in the scotch doubles and 1st place in the silver singles 8-ball. I didn't bother to look at how she did in any other events but I'm sure she didn't suck.