Still not following so I posted all of it for context.
First how do you determine a winner based on their Fargo ratings...? Second how does Fargo eliminate luck from the game...?
Morra and Shaw on MR break rules and pocket size
- Thread starter jbart65
- Start date
First how do you determine a winner based on their Fargo ratings...? Second how does Fargo eliminate luck from the game...?
I think we've strayed away from the "luck" that's being discussed. There is a gross difference between the local tavern luck generated by slashing at everything and getting unintentional but positive outcomes, and the "luck" that's eliminated by shrinking the pocket size. Which I think we were originally focusing on.
IMHO, 'luck' as generally considered (fluke pots), doesn't for the most part exist in the pro game. Sure there are rare instances, but they are few and far between. "Luck" at this level is more about hitting something badly and having the loose table still accept a ball.
Please point to where I said anything about a luckless game.
At the greatest level of play in any sport luck plays a less significant role. Shots / plays that are preceived as luck from an outside observer are deeply rooted in skill.
The best at what they do create their own "luck."
oscargrouch
Active member
Do you consider the guy beating him by two strokes playing the last four holes in three over par luck?
not necessarily. the cb usually moves more than ob, and luck is often related to position, fluking a safe, or avoiding a scratch. could be argued that tighter pockets helps with the latter
Rory shot himself in the foot.
Did you see Bryson play the 72nd hole? All sorts of bad could have happened there. He made his own luck and won the championship.
Shaw and Morra are Matchroom deep state operatives. They are part of a global cabal trafficking 4" pockets with deep shelves everywhere. Everybody knows that....
Reverse handicapping. Give the higher rated player games on the wire
Semantics... Luck could be argued into literally everything.
However, I think the differential between close call CB scratches regarding vs OB slop is highly in favour of tight pockets eliminating the later and nearly inconsequential with the former.
For a given maximum match length, sets significantly reduce the better player's advantage and increase the luck factor.
Without luck higher Fargo rated player gets the win. Fargo is pretty accurate and most games would probably follow that pattern without good luck or bad luck.
Oh I get it... It's not that fargo itself has anything to do with determining the winner. Just that if we didn't bother playing matches and thereby removed the random nature of the game (partially luck), we might as well just compare fargos and award the win to highest.
Pretty extreme take on the effort to remove slop from the game. Really boils down to whether or not someone thinks the best player or the most fortunate on the day should win or not.
To me, a similar concept would be to have a year long season and just pay out the top prize based on accumulated points throughout the season....that's kinda what fargo ratings are to me in a sense. However, luck adds excitement....I'm in that camp....so keep on as per the norm as far as I'm concerned. Pool ain't broke IMHO. Players and promoters can try to tweak it all they want, but it's not moving the needle much IMHO. To be interested in watching pro pool, they need to recruit new players.... thankfully that does seem to be happening, though I can't imagine that the pocket specs at pro events have anything to do with that. But pool still remains a fairly tough sell....I rarely hear of players talking about the pro scene on my local pool rooms. I feel like I am a knowledgeable enough player and all, but even I rarely tune in to a pro match. Per Oscar Gamble, "They don't think it be like it is, but it do."
Sort of, but not quite. Yes, Fargo is pretty accurate, but Mike Page has indicated that a player will usually perform at a level within 50 points of his or her Fargo. Hence, the lower Fargo will win lots of matches when the Fargo rates are fairly close. Of course, a player rated 100 points below his or her opponent will rarely win.
So a league for pros based on performance stats rather than win/loss....? I really don't understand your take on fargo. It's nothing like you make it seem to be. Fargo is completely independent of leagues, amateur or pro organizations. Just a rating based on a player's performance against other players.
In an effort to get us on the same page. No one has actually done anything to remove luck from the pro version of 9b. The rule set in that regard has remained the same. The tightening of pockets isn't about removing 'luck' but more so punishing inaccurate play.
Unless of course you consider a shot missing the pocket by a foot or so and still dropping "lucky", then I guess your argument is sound. I don't view a poorly missed shot still dropping as 'lucky'.
"Much" is a subjective word. I have seen many comments on this board, and I agree with them that the state of professional pool is notably on the rise. Does the pocket size have 'much' or anything to do with it...? Well, I do think it humanizes the game to some extent. That allows Joe SixPack relate to the players.
Agree 100%... The chatter in my local room about the pro game is very minor, and typically only the very serious players pay attention. Of course that's partially due to the type of clientele my local room cultivates. It's a pool room, but the ownership is more concerned about Nascar or giving their buddies an open mic for their garage band.
I also don't pony up any of my income for streaming access. I enjoy the game, and like watching the elite clash, but the game is too stale on the entertainment level for me. Having players on equipment that allows for terrible yet successful play wouldn't make me tune in either.
I think you and I agree more than not. All I mean about Fargo is that it measures long term performance...and I think a top prize based on points standing at the end of a season would reward similarly approximate long term performance. I am especially like you regarding my viewership of pro matches. I pretty much only tune in to portions of a marquee match when it interests me and also when I wish to study the game. Outside of that, I'd rather go play pool, go hiking or fishing.
I don't expect pool to become a big spectator sport in the U.S. Too many existing sports and other forms of leisure and entertainment for people to pursue.
The growth in the sport is overseas, and that is what MR appears to focused on.
I do like to watch pool and I watch a fair amount. But I pretty much just watch the top players vs. each other. I also tend to watch either live when I am playing pool or delayed when I am relaxing on my deck or in bed. Off peak hours so to speak.
I personally think pool is great to watch, but I am not sure I would think that if I didn't play. What I most like to do when I watch is to try to figure out how each player will approach each shot and layout. Kind of like a jigsaw puzzle.
It's helped my own game to see different ways the pros look at shots ...
Badpenguin
Well-known member
Yeah, predicting the shots and patterns is part of the fun of watching pool. The only problem for me is that watching pool just makes me want to play pool, so I just go do that. I've not turned on the TV since February though, so I'm not your average media consumer. Now that I think about it, AZB and the onepocket site are my only social media accounts....wait, no, I have a dormant Instagram account too, lol. No matter.
Cheers bud, have a great weekend.
Neil
Its not just slop. Cue ball gets kicked in on the break or 2 ball stops in front of the pocket for an easy opener. Cue ball freezes to the blocker on a safety, it takes skill to get the cue ball on the correct line but its a bit of a good roll to have it nestle up tightly against the blocking ball. Shot ends up safe after a missed ball. We could go on all day about good and bad fortune but I feel all of these things are what makes the match interesting. If they are to play the game without either good or bad luck we might as well watch them play a spot shot match to 100, that would be a challenge of skill........unless of course there was some chalk on either ball, then its back to luck again should that spot of chalk be on the contact point.