Johnny Archer and Fargo Ratings

[Bob Jewett]

I am all for TRANSPARENCY this is not transparent???

Disclose what a TOP PLAYER must do to be #1, #2, #3, #4, #5???

old data is used to formulate this system is CRAZY. Archer 10 years ago is not Archer today!!!

KD

The fundamentals of the system were explained in Mike's Billiards Digest article, but it is basically like the ELO system in chess. If you perform better than what your rating predicts in a particular match, your rating will go up, and if you perform worse your rating will go down. If Johnny Archer beats me by only 11-7 in a tournament, his rating goes down because he should beat me by about 11-3 (according to our ratings).

In general, you have to win most of your games against top players to be rated higher than they are, but you could get there by always beating shortstops 9-2. The way most competition works the top players have to play the top players quite a bit.

As has been explained, old data is used but it has less weight than recent data. In particular, games 10 years ago are only 10% as important as games played yesterday.

You could reproduce the system yourself or something very close to it from what has already been said and if you had the match data you could calculate the ratings yourself. I think that's pretty transparent.

 

[BeiberLvr]

i appreciate your post and comment. I think it could work very well ranking international and domestic players together for an unbiased seeding system used at the US OPEN 9 ball and other major events.

All I ask, is that safety nets exist and transparency provided. That way, a contender can assure they are not cheated and can assess what they need to do to merit, what every the sport has to offer.

KD

I'm sorry.

Can you point to where anyone has said any person with a Fargo rating is a contender for anything?

 

[ElCorazonFrio]

The planet Tralfamador and no Fargo rating for Billy Pilgrim? Anybody? Anybody?

If Pilgrim ever shows, it'll be like a slaughterhouse up in there.

It'll likely garner the attention of at least one pornstar.

 

[iusedtoberich]

I'm sorry.

Can you point to where anyone has said any person with a Fargo rating is a contender for anything?

No one has said that as of yet (that I saw anyway). However, I was thinking about this, and why not? If the system if proven pretty accurate, then why not have it be used for seeding in major national and international events? We always complain of unfair seedings, or seedings based on xyz promoter's whims, or that seedings are not possible because there is no system that seeds logically. Well, we now potentially have one.

I would imagine that CSI, since according to the FargoRate website is in some sort of affiliation with them, might be the first to seed a pro event based on these ratings.

Just my opinion

 

[Kid Dynomite]

No one has said that as of yet (that I saw anyway). However, I was thinking about this, and why not? If the system if proven pretty accurate, then why not have it be used for seeding in major national and international events? We always complain of unfair seedings, or seedings based on xyz promoter's whims, or that seedings are not possible because there is no system that seeds logically. Well, we now potentially have one.

I would imagine that CSI, since according to the FargoRate website is in some sort of affiliation with them, might be the first to seed a pro event based on these ratings.

Just my opinion

Thank you for this post! it clearly states what I was thinking and going to say!

KD

 

[jcrack_corn]

Seedings only work when play is standardized. It's unlikely this will ever happen in pool...different tourneys have different formats/rules, theres so many different games, and so much different playing equipment (tables).

Seedings work for pro sports, tennis, less used in golf, where all equipment and playing conditions are standardized (as much as possible per toruney in golf).

Pool has so many variables that it is very data intensive to even come close to a useful rating (even if its and ACCURATE rating). I applaud anyone who tries. And who cares about transparency, transparency doesnt apply in private endeavors.

Imo open tourneys should have qualifiers and then the main event should be random draws

 

[mikepage]

If Pilgrim ever shows, it'll be like a slaughterhouse up in there.[...].

Billy gets the orange crush from Kilgore Trout

 

[mikepage]

Seedings only work when play is standardized. It's unlikely this will ever happen in pool...different tourneys have different formats/rules, theres so many different games, and so much different playing equipment (tables).

Fortunately, the two players in a match never play different formats, or with different rules, or different games, or on different equipment

For many and even most events seeding is not appropriate. But when it IS appropriate, I am confident you can expect to see Fargo Ratings used going forward.

 

[ElCorazonFrio]

Billy gets the orange crush from Kilgore Trout

Depends on whether Kilgore spent the night in the cradle (with or without cats) and what he had for breakfast...

Regardless, we'll never know unless there is some sort of timequake.

Big fan of KVjr here.

 

[ElCorazonFrio]

For many and even most events seeding is not appropriate.

I disagree, I believe any event which intends to have an audience must be seeded for at least the top 25-50% of the field. The audience is there to see the best possible final. While the matchup for the final of a double elimination will mostly be the correct matchup, if the two finalists had already played in the first round, the winner of losers will have played nearly twice as many matches as the winner's bracket finalist and will have exerted much more energy just getting to the final.

In any single elimination tourney, the event should be seeded or the players are forced to take a huge risk.

 

[Bob Jewett]

I disagree, I believe any event which intends to have an audience must be seeded for at least the top 25-50% of the field. The audience is there to see the best possible final. While the matchup for the final of a double elimination will mostly be the correct matchup, if the two finalists had already played in the first round, the winner of losers will have played nearly twice as many matches as the winner's bracket finalist and will have exerted much more energy just getting to the final.

In any single elimination tourney, the event should be seeded or the players are forced to take a huge risk.

I think in the US most events are not seeded. They are double elimination with the majority of the prize fund contributed by the players. Spectators (except maybe to generate a calcutta) are secondary. The goal is to get as many entries as possible to increase the prize fund and I think seeding tends to discourage entries to such events.

Seeding makes sense for things like World Championships but there the organization probably has its own seeding system that is largely based on recent participation and performance rather than simply skill levels.

 

[ElCorazonFrio]

Seeding makes sense for things like World Championships but there the organization probably has its own seeding system that is largely based on recent participation and performance rather than simply skill levels.

Seeding should be based on concrete things like participation and performance, not something subjective like skill level.

Skill level is completely subjective. Participating and performance can be quantified.

 

[Jaden]

No it's not.

Seeding should be based on concrete things like participation and performance, not something subjective like skill level.

Skill level is completely subjective. Participating and performance can be quantified.

Not in this context. That's the thing about the fargo rating. It's skill in a performance setting that it is measuring.

Getting 6 games in a race to 9 against a player that is rated 750 does not happen accidentally. It is quantifiable as skill.

Jaden

 

[BRussell]

The goal is to get as many entries as possible to increase the prize fund and I think seeding tends to discourage entries to such events.

Interesting. I would think seeding would discourage some players (the weakest ones who get seeded to play the strongest in the early rounds) but encourage others (the strongest ones who avoid the other strongest ones until the end, and maybe even the mid-level players who play other mid-level players early on). But if the goal is to get more weaker players in to build the pot, seeding could be a problem for them.

 

[ElCorazonFrio]

Not in this context. That's the thing about the fargo rating. It's skill in a performance setting that it is measuring.

Getting 6 games in a race to 9 against a player that is rated 750 does not happen accidentally. It is quantifiable as skill.

Jaden

So, quantify the skill in your example. How many pounds of skill does that person have? What is the measurable unit of skill? Is it one 'ableness' of skill?

Only the results are quantifiable.

One may need to be very skilled to obtain the results, but do not mistake that as meaning that skill is quantified.

 

[Jaden]

ok...

So, quantify the skill in your example. How many pounds of skill does that person have? What is the measurable unit of skill? Is it one 'ableness' of skill?

Only the results are quantifiable.

One may need to be very skilled to obtain the results, but do not mistake that as meaning that skill is quantified.

And how much wood could a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood.

They would have the amount of skill it takes to win six games against a 750 in a race to nine.

That becomes algorithmically predictable the more people you have recordings of doing the same thing.

I don't think you really care though as it seems you just want to knock it.

Jaden

 

[BRussell]

A good distinction might be one that psychological and educational testing uses: ability tests (like IQ) and achievement tests (like AP tests). The distinction isn't perfect but it's analogous to Fargo ratings (ability) vs. money lists (achievement). Archer and Appleton have equivalent ability ratings but Appleton (in recent years) has higher achievement.

 

[TorranceChris]

App on Galaxy?

Mike,

You make mention of Fargo Rate mobile app on your FAQ page. Is there one available for Androids ? I'm unable to find it in the Play Store on my Samsung Galaxy. Is there a way to find fargo rating for myself currently ?

Thanks. I think this is a very worthwhile rating system that is long overdue.
--Chris

 

[ElCorazonFrio]

And how much wood could a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood.

They would have the amount of skill it takes to win six games against a 750 in a race to nine.

That becomes algorithmically predictable the more people you have recordings of doing the same thing.

I don't think you really care though as it seems you just want to knock it.

Jaden

I haven't knocked anything. I have disagreed with a single point about seeding tourneys and with your statement that this measures skill or that you can quantify skill.

You can quantify performance...and that is a single indication of a lot of skills combined, but there are many factors that may influence performance without diminishing skill.