Leagues that Award mediocrity

3

3RAILKICK

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
How does your league operate?

Does the format encourage improvement or reward lesser goals? Namely capitalizing on handicap structures to do well in the standings and payouts? OK, maybe that is not a lesser goal.

Is the focus on participation-encouraging the formation of new teams that may be just beginning to play the game?

Our league has been won by the lowest skilled teams for the last several sessions. That's OK. The league is a great league. All the money in pays back out to players.

Interestingly, after league is over, no one from a lower rated team is to be found. More serious, higher rated players, remain and match up or practice.

Note: 4(man teams) x 4=16 game match. 16 weeks. Ratings A+=4 pts. A=3. B=2. C=1. Maximum A's on team =2. Team total rating points differential divided by 2 =bonus games awarded to lesser team in addition to games won on a given match. Example: eam 'A'(A,A-, B+, B=10 pts)/Team 'C'(C, C+, C-, C=4pts) 10-4=6/2=3games 'modifier' wins in addition to actual wins during match.

Game handicaps vary with skill/rating differences-last two, 8, 7, 6.


Combining the inherent tendency to under-rate skill levels, award and reward lack of improvement, makes for interesting league outcomes.



How does your league work? Do better teams do well? Is there incentive to improve? Does it matter much? Is it just a night out? Do you get your 'serious' taste elsewhere-tournaments or matching up?



My sense is-just play. Consider it an additional challenge. Is it fair? Does that matter? it's how the league is structured-deal with it -or don't.

The additional teams buy more food and drink-that supports the room that doesn't charge for 'green fees'/the LD doesn't take a dime/all the money pays back out to players. Yeah-some game the system-but imagine that-in pool or life? really?

A league that rewards mediocrity? Guess it depends on who you talk to.


These things have been talked about before-sorry for the repetition. This came up the other night during league. (yes-we lost to 4 C's):( -so play better!:embarrassed2:

take care
 
This subject comes up quite frequently. Mostly as an APA bashing thread. I'm with you on the lower handicap team winning once in a while thing. Need to bring new players into the fold. Need to keep lower ranked players as well. Problem is, where do you draw the line? How much do you reward players that don't practice? Don't play any other time but in the league? Don't contribute to the league other than take the money home? Got to be a balance point somewhere. Without the lower level players, there can be neither leagues nor tournaments. Very interesting question.

Lyn
 
Back in the old days

like the late 60's or 70's, the handicap was about 90% in leagues, meaning the lower player had to shoot 10% or better than their average to be able to win. This format encouraged lower players to get better to be able to win. Now, we have 100% handicapping, and the upper players have to shoot perfect to be able to win, and noone shoots perfect all the time.

This type of handicapping, in fact, punishes better players for being better. Lower level players no longer look to getting good, they just want to be at the top of their handicap level, but not go up. The leagues did this to encourage new players or low level players to play, and advertise that anyone can win. Part of the problem with this is, lower level players progress much faster than a high level player that probably has already reached their peak in their game.

An example I can give is our weekly 8 ball tournaments at Stix on Friday and Saturday nights. They are handicapped from 2 to 6. If you win (get 1st or 2nd) 3 times, you go up in handicap. If you go 2 and out 3 times, you go down 1 handicap. When these first started, all kinds of players played, and it was not uncommon to have 20-25 players for each tournament. The tournaments pay 200%, so a pretty decent payback.
Now, 85% of the entries are 2's, maybe a 3 or so, and maybe a couple of 4's, but what I am showing is most of the upper handicaps have quit participating because they have to shoot perfect to beat some of these 2's. We have 2's that can run an open table. I had one 2 break and run on the first game, and I broke dry next game, and he ran down to the 8 ball, and missed it before I really got a shot. The upper handicaps get tired of being beat by a 2 or 3. This is not considering the out of town players that show up, and most get rated a 3 to start when they are better than a 3 to start with. This happened last week, a player from Topeka got in as a 3, and he was clearly a 4 or 5, and he won the tournament.

Handicapping in Gambling - again back in the 70's, you got up and played a player 2 balls better than you for $10 or $20 just to meet the challenge. I would not adjust the game at all unless I was $500 or 3 sets up. Now, you have nits everywhere that want the world just to play.
They want to adjust the game after every set, even if you are playing a cheap set ($50).
 
I've seen them go either way.

Just keep in mind Leagues are a franchise (or run like it) , like 711. They're job is to keep the customers coming in and they are going to cater to the primary market.
 
My BCA sanctioned league uses the "4 person team - 16 game set" format with 1 "tie breaker game" if score is 8 to 8. The tie breaker only decides the match win & does not give an "extra" game won to the winning team or the winning player's stats.

Standing are based on match wins & the tie breaker is total games won - play off if necessary if teams are tied-tied at end of season.

NO handicapping or weight of any kind - just straight up 1 on 1 race to 1 with each opposing team's players.

YES the best team takes 1st place 99.9% of the time (& we all have great time with them while playing - read losing). YES the 2 worst teams are always fighting it out to see who comes in last - LOL. (but they are learning & getting better slowly). Then we have a huge log-jam in the middle with only "games" deciding standings.

Everybody's money is green & are welcome to compete. My "admin" fee is 10% so 90% goes back to the players via table runs paid throughout the season, MVP, added $$$$ to season ending "A" & "B" tournaments and team prize money. EVERYBODY gets money at the end of the season - 1st a lot more than last but nobody finishes "one out of the money" :smile:
 
Last edited:
Most of my league play has been in the APA (30+ seasons) and as far as handicapping systems go, it does okay. I have a higher winning percentage against lower ranked players than higher ones. Sure, it sucks to run into a bandit SL3, but it doesn't happen all that often. The SL I hate the most in the APA are SL4's. The range of player at that level is huge from guys that can break and run to guys that can follow in an easy 8 ball... All handicap systems will reward mediocre play to same degree (that's exactly the point of a handicap system) and the APA falls short where skill levels are easily manipulated by not marking safeties correctly and shooters intentionally missing shots that they are portraying as an attempt to pocket... I've been in leagues in different areas and find that the league operator's attitude and attentiveness really dictates what level of sandbagging occurs. Whenever I've filed a handicap review for an opponent the league op always moved them to my suggestion. There have only been a few cases of it happening, but when you can see and cite specific shots played by the player that only highly skilled and knowledgeable players are capable of, it becomes easy to make your case.

I'm sure most know the basic APA system, but if not, in short it's basically an estimation of how many innings it takes a player to finish a rack. The most crucial statistic is [# of innings - # of safeties] and then there's a whole bunch of other math that happens taking into account table size and other factors. In general it seems that SL7's should average less than 2 innings/rack, SL6's less than 3, SL5's, less than 4 and on down the line... There very well may be people here who have figured out more of the formula for APA SL calculation than I have, but I think this is a pretty good estimation.

My limited BCA experience of having to call all safeties addresses the SL manipulation much better. I've liked my BCA experiences. I have no idea how the handicap system worked. It was a little weird getting used to just playing one rack against each player on their team of 8 ball and 9 ball, but once I got used to not really having an official match against a specific player I was able to get in the right frame of mind to shoot to my normal capability.
 
I have the opinion that handicap scales can work if you keep them narrow enough, but if you stretch them too far then you're inviting people to exploit flaws, such as sandbagging.

If you lump all players together in one league, yes, you will get the issues you have pointed out. If we make the analogy of pool players as students, in small markets out of necessity you'll have the one room schoolhouse, or the one league town. In larger markets, you'll have enough students to form an elementary school, middle, and high school. In those larger markets, the league operator is doing a disservice to the players by keeping the players in one league.

I'm fortunate to play in a pool hall that supports both an 8-ball and 9-ball league. The poolhall markets the 8-ball for beginners and intermediates, and 9-ball league caters to intermediates and advanced players.

League season is 12-16 weeks, and its 3 seasons a year. In the 8-ball league, I say 75% are at APA SL 3 or lower, and the highest in the league would be equal to a SL6.

The more competitive, and higher skilled players join the 9-ball league. The handicap scale goes from D to A and up to Pro level. I've seen players improve from going to a C+ to A in the span of 2-3 years (not me unfortunately). I did improve enough that playing as D, the handicap scale was fair enough for me to play competitively.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top