Interesting FB post about FargoRate

[David in FL]

I bolded the sentence I'm asking about. Are you sure about that? I played in a chip tournament not long ago and my rating went up two points by beating people 1-0.

It’s worth noting that your rate can go up or down a point or two from day to day without even playing.

It continually looks at the matches that you have played and the people that you have played. If some of the people that you have played are trending up, your FargoRate might move slightly as a result.

 

[easy-e]

It’s worth noting that your rate can go up or down a point or two from day to day without even playing.

It continually looks at the matches that you have played and the people that you have played. If some of the people that you have played are trending up, your FargoRate might move slightly as a result.

I agree and have experienced that. I just don't think going 1-0 would lower your score.

 

[David in FL]

I agree and have experienced that. I just don't think going 1-0 would lower your score.

My point is, it might not have. It could’ve just been a day to day variance…

 

[hang-the-9]

I've beat two 600s and had a bnr on a 530 on a league night and only gone up 2 points , it's only when I go 5-0 it goes up say 5points
I've got over 400 games in , still don't really understand it much

It takes a lot of matches to get settled in the ratings. Any few league nights will not change things. It's not designed to swing your ratings wildly back and forth every week. TAP and APA leagues are setup so you can be a 5 one week, a 6 the next, go down to a 5 week after, few weeks be a 7, a week after be a 6 again. If you think about it, it takes 200 matches to be "established" You play say 10 matches over 10 weeks, even if you win all of them you are at only 5% of your total recorded matches, so just 5% of your results will not shoot your rating up that much. I have over 1,000 matches in the system, I would need to beat better players than me for a while before my rating started to creep up more than 5%.

 

[hang-the-9]

From Texas Pool Players page.

WHAT WE (FargoRate) DID
Removed from FargoRate Eight TX tournaments called “Scooters 9-Ball” dated between April and July 2022.
Brackets: https://challonge.com/users/melissasmith22/tournaments

WHY WE DID IT
We judge the match data not credible.
EXPLANATION
Regular players in the tournaments include one with a history of thousands of games played around 450 speed (THE 450) as well as two well established players in the vicinity of 700 (THE 700’s).
In the Eight Scooter’s tournaments, THE 450 faces THE 700’s 27 times and wins 21 of the matches. Further, the match wins tend to be lopsided scores and the match losses tend to be close scores. This makes the game count even more egregious. Of the 250 games played between THE 450 and THE 700’s, THE 450 won 171 of them, a number expected of an 800-level player.
NOW WHAT?
Once again, we judge these results not credible, and we lack the necessary confidence moving forward to import data from this TD/Venue.

I like the fact they are actually paying attention to oddness that like this. Up yours sandbaggers.

 

[AtLarge]

It takes a lot of matches to get settled in the ratings. Any few league nights will not change things. It's not designed to swing your ratings wildly back and forth every week. TAP and APA leagues are setup so you can be a 5 one week, a 6 the next, go down to a 5 week after, few weeks be a 7, a week after be a 6 again. If you think about it, it takes 200 matches to be "established" You play say 10 matches over 10 weeks, even if you win all of them you are at only 5% of your total recorded matches, so just 5% of your results will not shoot your rating up that much. I have over 1,000 matches in the system, I would need to beat better players than me for a while before my rating started to creep up more than 5%.

Games, not matches. Per FargoRate FAQ:

"Robustness is a measure of the reliability of a player’s Fargo Rating. For now, it is simply the number of games a player has played that contribute to his or her rating. A robustness of 200 is a minimum standard for us to consider a rating “established.”"​

 

[alphadog]

There is more mis information about fr then covid

 

[Jaden]

I bolded the sentence I'm asking about. Are you sure about that? I played in a chip tournament not long ago and my rating went up two points by beating people 1-0.

I'm not positive, but how could it NOT if it's actually counted? I mean, if they beat you and they would have to go up? So how could you not go down?

Jaden

 

[easy-e]

I'm not positive, but how could it NOT if it's actually counted? I mean, if they beat you and they would have to go up? So how could you not go down?

Jaden

In a league night, if I go 3-2 my rating is certain to drop. When I go 5-0 (depending on the strength of the team I'm playing) my rating tends to creep up a point. I understand how losing to a 300 speed player makes them go up and me go down, but I don't think going 1-0 against ANY fargo rating would lower my score.

 

[telinoz]

Last year we had a 500 player break and run 1 game on a finals weekend vs the best player in the country who is mid 700 rating.
Knocking his team out of the finals.
He is mates with the league operator, so they dig around in player history and find 3 matches out of thousands when a 380 got the better of him one night. So they make a big noise, FargoRate puts the 500 on a 550 rating...
Talk about folding like a cheap suit.

Some of us were that disgusted with it, we played the new 550 several times. With witnesses present from the league in Salotto challenges etc.
As expected, he returned to his true rating around 500 in a month.

I started a thread a while back about the BCAPL app, how to correctly score forfeited matches.
As, this same league had been giving forfeited matches to the stronger player if a team gave up and could not win on the day, to avoid playing pointless games.
10 years worth of illegitimate games in FargoRate...
So once I got my facts right, I went to FargoRate and the League and got those results expunged.

Everyone happy I heard, except the league operator as between helping his mates out and having a mechanism to play the system I had systematically destroyed it.
Now, all players use the WF button and that is that.

The point is, FargoRate get it wrong sometimes.

Their scoring for a break and run against you, don't agree with it as you are not at the table.

Same with not accounting for 7ft vs 9ft tables, I have players that cannot beat me on a 9ft table.. Ever, but a 7ft they sometimes get games and the odd match if handicapped etc.

They are human, so are susceptible to pressure from a operator as in my example.
Because this guy said the 500 was a 550, they changed it based on little evidence.
Also a shame a top player could not take a loss on the chin either.

This example in the OP appears to be clear cut sandbagging.
But, just pointing out as good and as universally accepted around the World FargoRate is, it is nowhere near perfect. All systems I have ever seen can be gamed... Its up to the players to be diligent and honest and call out whoever when something is wrong.
I don't think any system will be, but there is room for improvement with what we have.

 

[gypsy_soul]

I learned everything I needed to learn about handicapping and sandbagging as a golfer for the past 50 years.

I admit, when FargoRate first came out I was pretty leery because of my experience with golfers and their ability to manipulate their handicaps.

However, over the past couple of years, I’ve come to appreciate that it actually does a pretty good job for the most part. Matches handicapped by FargoRate tend to be pretty fair, even with players of significantly different skill levels, and I‘ve found that most ratings pretty accurately reflect the relative ability of the players.

Having said that, I’m starting to see cases of sandbagging. Not necessarily so that one player has an advantage over another in a Fargo rate handicapped match/league, but because there are a lot of tournaments that limit entries based on FargoRate.

Some of these tournaments are pretty significant. An “under 600” tournament can easily have 64 players with payouts in the thousands of dollars and Calcuttas to match. When there’s several thousand dollars available for the top finishers, there’s a lot of incentive to keep your FargoRate under that 600 (or whatever) threshold if you can so you’re not excluded from the tournaments. That’s not too hard to do by dogging a few league matches. It can even be done pretty easily without affecting your league team standings with a little bit of care.

Should/could a league operator notice and manage these things? Probably. Maybe. Again, it can be pretty subtle.

Overall, I think FargoRate is the best handicapping system I’ve seen in pool. It pretty much does what it‘s supposed to do, and the ratings travel pretty well. Certainly much better than any kind of regional rating system that I’ve ever seen over the years. Sadly, any kind of system can be manipulated by an individual intent on doing so. About all we can do is keep an eye out for those individuals, and address them as aggressively as possible when they‘re found.

Not playing a rated tournament ever in my life , play even , I’m a ride or die !!!!!!!!!!!! Maple

 

[Jaden]

In a league night, if I go 3-2 my rating is certain to drop. When I go 5-0 (depending on the strength of the team I'm playing) my rating tends to creep up a point. I understand how losing to a 300 speed player makes them go up and me go down, but I don't think going 1-0 against ANY fargo rating would lower my score.

If you're supposed to win 4-0 against a player, how can a 1-0 score NOT lower your rating? You're only 1 game ahead where as you should be 4 games ahead.

Jaden

 

[geoff_182]

If you're supposed to win 4-0 against a player, how can a 1-0 score NOT lower your rating? You're only 1 game ahead where as you should be 4 games ahead.

Jaden

You were still "on pace" to beat the player 4-0.

Furthermore, I don't think there is a case where a player is supposed to be shut out (without rounding). Every 100 points difference means you are twice as good as the other player, so lets look at players with a 400 point difference, lets say a 700 vs a 300 in a race to 4. The expected score would actually be 4-0.25 ... or a 700 vs a 200 would be 4-0.125. and so on. It is exponential not linear, so the expected score of the loser should never reach 0.0. So If the higher ranked player is up 1-0 he is still on pace to beat the other player more than he should.

Of course with a rating difference of that much, their ratings might not even change at all, especially with only 1 game played. But the higher player's rating should never go down if they beat a player 1-0.

 

[geoff_182]

The more games someone has in the system, the closer they will be to having their fargorate actually reflect their ability. Yes, sandbagging can be a problem for someone who doesn't have many games in the system, but they can't sandbag forever.

The slight issue I have with fargorate is distinguishing between different games. People might not have the same ability at playing 8-ball and 9-ball. Someone might be an 8-ball league player for the past 5+ years, and they have improved to the point where they are 500 fargo. Then they enter a 9-ball tournament, which they have never played before. Should they still be rated at a 500?

I'm not sure if fargorate includes games like one pocket and bank pool, but they would create even more of a difference.

 

[alphadog]

Last year we had a 500 player break and run 1 game on a finals weekend vs the best player in the country who is mid 700 rating.
Knocking his team out of the finals.
He is mates with the league operator, so they dig around in player history and find 3 matches out of thousands when a 380 got the better of him one night. So they make a big noise, FargoRate puts the 500 on a 550 rating...
Talk about folding like a cheap suit.

Some of us were that disgusted with it, we played the new 550 several times. With witnesses present from the league in Salotto challenges etc.
As expected, he returned to his true rating around 500 in a month.

I started a thread a while back about the BCAPL app, how to correctly score forfeited matches.
As, this same league had been giving forfeited matches to the stronger player if a team gave up and could not win on the day, to avoid playing pointless games.
10 years worth of illegitimate games in FargoRate...
So once I got my facts right, I went to FargoRate and the League and got those results expunged.

Everyone happy I heard, except the league operator as between helping his mates out and having a mechanism to play the system I had systematically destroyed it.
Now, all players use the WF button and that is that.

The point is, FargoRate get it wrong sometimes.

Their scoring for a break and run against you, don't agree with it as you are not at the table.

Same with not accounting for 7ft vs 9ft tables, I have players that cannot beat me on a 9ft table.. Ever, but a 7ft they sometimes get games and the odd match if handicapped etc.

They are human, so are susceptible to pressure from a operator as in my example.
Because this guy said the 500 was a 550, they changed it based on little evidence.
Also a shame a top player could not take a loss on the chin either.

This example in the OP appears to be clear cut sandbagging.
But, just pointing out as good and as universally accepted around the World FargoRate is, it is nowhere near perfect. All systems I have ever seen can be gamed... Its up to the players to be diligent and honest and call out whoever when something is wrong.
I don't think any system will be, but there is room for improvement with what we have.

Most of this makes zero sense.

 

[Bobkitty]

Most of this makes zero sense.

NO doubt about it. Golf handicap is SO simple compared to FargoRating. Collect your scores, the course rating, and you're handicap is in. There must be something we can do for pool players? Maybe Dr. Dave's system might make the most sense. I have 110 in that 6 years ago and I did not have a jump stick so failed in that parameter. I think Robin Dreyer (a genius) could figure this stuff out. Maybe a series of contests on his ICA projector system to figure out how a person plays. He could do it if it was feasible. Just thinking here....

 

[Jaden]

You were still "on pace" to beat the player 4-0.

Furthermore, I don't think there is a case where a player is supposed to be shut out (without rounding). Every 100 points difference means you are twice as good as the other player, so lets look at players with a 400 point difference, lets say a 700 vs a 300 in a race to 4. The expected score would actually be 4-0.25 ... or a 700 vs a 200 would be 4-0.125. and so on. It is exponential not linear, so the expected score of the loser should never reach 0.0. So If the higher ranked player is up 1-0 he is still on pace to beat the other player more than he should.

Of course with a rating difference of that much, their ratings might not even change at all, especially with only 1 game played. But the higher player's rating should never go down if they beat a player 1-0.

Yes, but not on pace as much as he should be. It will never work out to get a better player to a truly higher number.

Beating someone 1-0 that should be a 5-2 race means that to win and break even with where you should be, it would be 5-1. Winning 1-0 means you're 4 games shy of where you should be. Also, anyone can win a given game. Fargo is not meant to judge players on single game entries. It's meant to get an average over time.

If someone who as a hot race, you should beat 5-1 in order to win at close the on paper differential, gets that first game and beats you 1-0 and that's what's recorded (i.e. in a chip tourney like I was talking about) you go down substantially more than you should, because you don't have an opportunity to bring out the true statistical average.

It's also true in other hot races. If you beat someone 5-1 who only has to go to 2 to win, the reality if it were say a race to 13, might be that you win 13-1. Not having that longer race prevents you from moving up to where you should be.

If you only play in tournaments where there are only 1 or 2 players close to or above your rating, you will NEVER get to your true rating.

If you want to know your TRUE rating you have to play in higher level tournaments AND mid level, AND low level. Or rather, you need to be playing against all calibers of player. Unfortunately, with fargo handicapped tournaments, you'll never get a true rating because of how the handicapping works. Lesser players don't have to get to the same number of games, so if they get their games earlier in the match, there isn't an opportunity for the better player to get a true statistical average for that match. You should be able to see that if those lower level players are all you typically get to compete against, there is ONLY an opportunity for the LOWER level player to fluke out against the higher level player, and ZERO chance for the higher level player to make up for those games by winning by a higher margin because the set is over prior to getting that opportunity.

Jaden

Jaden

 

[Jaden]

NO doubt about it. Golf handicap is SO simple compared to FargoRating. Collect your scores, the course rating, and you're handicap is in. There must be something we can do for pool players? Maybe Dr. Dave's system might make the most sense. I have 110 in that 6 years ago and I did not have a jump stick so failed in that parameter. I think Robin Dreyer (a genius) could figure this stuff out. Maybe a series of contests on his ICA projector system to figure out how a person plays. He could do it if it was feasible. Just thinking here....

The t.p.a is a better sample of actual ability. It doesn't rely on your opponent's ability being accurate and is closer to golf handicaps. The problem is accurately, easily and consistently recording those results.

Someone who averages in the .900s, would be top pro level, someone averaging in the mid to high .800s would be low pro short stop, so on and so on.

It would be similar to a bell curve, bunched up in the middle with few at the top or at the bottom.

Jaden

 

[Bobkitty]

The t.p.a is a better sample of actual ability. It doesn't rely on your opponent's ability being accurate and is closer to golf handicaps. The problem is accurately, easily and consistently recording those results.

Someone who averages in the .900s, would be top pro level, someone averaging in the mid to high .800s would be low pro short stop, so on and so on.

It would be similar to a bell curve, bunched up in the middle with few at the top or at the bottom.

Jaden

What is the T.P.A. ?? I'll try to look it up.

 

[alphadog]

NO doubt about it. Golf handicap is SO simple compared to FargoRating. Collect your scores, the course rating, and you're handicap is in. There must be something we can do for pool players? Maybe Dr. Dave's system might make the most sense. I have 110 in that 6 years ago and I did not have a jump stick so failed in that parameter. I think Robin Dreyer (a genius) could figure this stuff out. Maybe a series of contests on his ICA projector system to figure out how a person plays. He could do it if it was feasible. Just thinking here....

Nice job of missquoting me. His post made no sense. Fargorate seems quite good.