My Fargorate progression

VVP

Registered
Shot making is 90% of pool. Don't let anyone tell you differently.
True at the amateur level. For the 700+, I believe the mental part of the game weighs much higher than the technical.

Do you play Fargo reported tournaments that are on 9 footers or just barbox or both? Just curious.
 

loggerhead12

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
A strong mental game may help you stay focused enough to stay near your peak capability, or it may give you enough clarity to know your limitations, which doesn't always help your pocketing. It's almost like blind optimism is better.

Amusingly, that's true in entrepreneurship as well. Many of the successful business owners I know don't sweat the details or worry about what could go wrong.
 

Willowbrook Wolfy

Going pro
Gold Member
I deleted my post cause kept editing it. It’s hard to keep it at an abridged version. Sorry about that.
Point was, iubrich. A higher level player is going to have a straighter stroke. That’s a natural progression. Don’t watch low 600’s. Watch high 6’s and up to see the more important details. Remember. You can only get as good as your competition.
 

Jimmorrison

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
It’s speed control! It’s all about speed control. Can you back cut that ball into the upper right corner, with a bunch of low left? Yes, you can, if you fire at it. You can’t do it at the correct speed, to land on your next shot. That’s the difference between the bad and the good, the good and the great. All the greats, and even the goods, can play the ball down. That’s the difference.
 

philly

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
It’s speed control! It’s all about speed control. Can you back cut that ball into the upper right corner, with a bunch of low left? Yes, you can, if you fire at it. You can’t do it at the correct speed, to land on your next shot. That’s the difference between the bad and the good, the good and the great. All the greats, and even the goods, can play the ball down. That’s the difference.
I have to agree with those that go with consistent pocketing of balls to be the difference.
Of course cue ball speed is important but I think you get to certain skill level in your game (600+ Fargorate).
that getting relatively good shape is the easy part of the game.
I agree "perfect" shape is an art that only 700+ Fargorates achieve consistently.
Consistently pocketing balls is the whole difference.
Pocketing balls keeps you at the table.
Tough to lose a match when your opponent does not spend much time at the table.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
View attachment 709164

I played in my first tournament that reported Fargorate a couple weeks ago. I was not avoiding them, just none were available. It was a local Friday night event, with short races to 2-3 or so depending on fargorate. I think I played three matches, winning one and losing two. After 9 games, I'm at 386. I felt I could have given the 2 players that beat me the 7 ball. Such is pool:)

Two of my buddies that I used to gamble with daily about 20 years ago are in the mid 500's, with approx 400 and 600 robustness. They are the only players in my area I played even with at any time in my life that are in the system. However, none of us have the pool "bug" like we did when we were coming up, as we are in our mid 40's now. Based on this, I think I will end up at 565 if I ever get to a few hundred games. I'll update if I get more games in the system.

Maybe I can match up with people and say I'm a 386:):):)

Most leagues set the starting Fargo too low. It will be a long ride into the 500's if you were started in the 300's. I start all new (unknown) players at 525. From there the score pretty much moves up or down fairly quickly in relation to your game. At 386, based on some of the video footage you've shared, you are way underrated. Good for you if you enter a fargo-rated tournament, but bad for anybody that has to play you.

I remember playing a 450 rated player in Vegas (VNEA championships), and he broke and ran every rack on his 3 breaks, along with 2 of my dry breaks. I broke and ran the 1st rack. It was the only game I played, other than breaking dry twice. He beat me 5-1. No biggie, I lost. It wasn't a handicap tournament, but if it had been, based on fargo ratings, I would've been spotting him 2 or 3 games! That's ridiculous.
 

soyale

Well-known member
Most leagues set the starting Fargo too low. It will be a long ride into the 500's if you were started in the 300's. I start all new (unknown) players at 525. From there the score pretty much moves up or down fairly quickly in relation to your game. At 386, based on some of the video footage you've shared, you are way underrated. Good for you if you enter a fargo-rated tournament, but bad for anybody that has to play you.

I remember playing a 450 rated player in Vegas (VNEA championships), and he broke and ran every rack on his 3 breaks, along with 2 of my dry breaks. I broke and ran the 1st rack. It was the only game I played, other than breaking dry twice. He beat me 5-1. No biggie, I lost. It wasn't a handicap tournament, but if it had been, based on fargo ratings, I would've been spotting him 2 or 3 games! That's ridiculous.
am i wrong or does that seem really strong for 450?
 

Justaneng

Registered
am i wrong or does that seem really strong for 450?

That’s really strong for a 550, or at least catching that 550 on “once in a lifetime” day. A 450 can break and run on a bar box, but are not likely to more than a few % of the time and busting out a 3-pack would be like getting struck by lightening twice.
 

mikepage

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Most leagues set the starting Fargo too low. It will be a long ride into the 500's if you were started in the 300's. I start all new (unknown) players at 525. From there the score pretty much moves up or down fairly quickly in relation to your game. At 386, based on some of the video footage you've shared, you are way underrated. Good for you if you enter a fargo-rated tournament, but bad for anybody that has to play you.

I remember playing a 450 rated player in Vegas (VNEA championships), and he broke and ran every rack on his 3 breaks, along with 2 of my dry breaks. I broke and ran the 1st rack. It was the only game I played, other than breaking dry twice. He beat me 5-1. No biggie, I lost. It wasn't a handicap tournament, but if it had been, based on fargo ratings, I would've been spotting him 2 or 3 games! That's ridiculous.

You are not understanding the way it works. It turns out he had no starter rating at all (like more than half the players who enter the system). But even if he did, it wouldn't matter if that starter rating was 100 or 800, he'd be at the same place now.
 

iusedtoberich

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Most leagues set the starting Fargo too low. It will be a long ride into the 500's if you were started in the 300's. I start all new (unknown) players at 525. From there the score pretty much moves up or down fairly quickly in relation to your game. At 386, based on some of the video footage you've shared, you are way underrated. Good for you if you enter a fargo-rated tournament, but bad for anybody that has to play you.

I remember playing a 450 rated player in Vegas (VNEA championships), and he broke and ran every rack on his 3 breaks, along with 2 of my dry breaks. I broke and ran the 1st rack. It was the only game I played, other than breaking dry twice. He beat me 5-1. No biggie, I lost. It wasn't a handicap tournament, but if it had been, based on fargo ratings, I would've been spotting him 2 or 3 games! That's ridiculous.
See post 267 for my latest graph.
 

BC21

https://www.playpoolbetter.com
Gold Member
Silver Member
You are not understanding the way it works. It turns out he had no starter rating at all (like more than half the players who enter the system). But even if he did, it wouldn't matter if that starter rating was 100 or 800, he'd be at the same place now.

You're right... I don't understand it. Lol. I think you're the only one who understands how it works.

I thought it was you that said a good starter rate should be 525?? Lol. Can't remember.

I know we have had league players who were started out at something rediculous like 250 or 300 over the years, and they play a few games here and there, playing closer to 500 level but their score stays low because they just don't play enough games. Meanwhile, they skew the numbers of better players. I mean, when a 600 player gets beat by a 300 player who plays a hell of lot stronger than 300, that's an issue.

One player in particular was started out at 260 about 2 years ago. He played a handful of games back then. He has now returned to the league and plays much better nowadays, but his fargo has only climbed to 340's so far, though he plays much stronger.

I'm reminded of the old tootsie pop commercial, where the owl asks how many licks it takes to reach the center.... So, how many games does it take before the fargo system finally reveals the actual speed of the player?

Could the issue be with our league format - single games rather than races? Would this cause player ratings to stay far below their true game, at least when compared to playing races? Just curious.

I should add that I do like the fargo system, though some people manipulate it to their advantage. I am only 612, but I regularly beat local players between 620 and 650 in races. Just happens that our league is not races.... it's single games, you play one game per player, and you either win or lose, like a coin toss.
 

8cree

Reverse Engineer
Silver Member
You are not understanding the way it works. It turns out he had no starter rating at all (like more than half the players who enter the system). But even if he did, it wouldn't matter if that starter rating was 100 or 800, he'd be at the same place now.
Agreed, however, like he said... had it been a FR tourney, he would have had to spot the guy regardless, and that was his whole point about starting caps... likely the starting caps for unknowns will be unfavorable for one or the other, for a little while.
 

Atorontopoolplayer

Active member
You're right... I don't understand it. Lol. I think you're the only one who understands how it works.

I thought it was you that said a good starter rate should be 525?? Lol. Can't remember.

I know we have had league players who were started out at something rediculous like 250 or 300 over the years, and they play a few games here and there, playing closer to 500 level but their score stays low because they just don't play enough games. Meanwhile, they skew the numbers of better players. I mean, when a 600 player gets beat by a 300 player who plays a hell of lot stronger than 300, that's an issue.

One player in particular was started out at 260 about 2 years ago. He played a handful of games back then. He has now returned to the league and plays much better nowadays, but his fargo has only climbed to 340's so far, though he plays much stronger.

I'm reminded of the old tootsie pop commercial, where the owl asks how many licks it takes to reach the center.... So, how many games does it take before the fargo system finally reveals the actual speed of the player?

Could the issue be with our league format - single games rather than races? Would this cause player ratings to stay far below their true game, at least when compared to playing races? Just curious.

I should add that I do like the fargo system, though some people manipulate it to their advantage. I am only 612, but I regularly beat local players between 620 and 650 in races. Just happens that our league is not races.... it's single games, you play one game per player, and you either win or lose, like a coin toss.
There've been quite a lot of threads/ posts e.t.c about how the starter rates diminish in importance over time and eventually have 0 actual impact I think it's 200 racks on the system, which is what most TDs around here require at minimum to enter Fargo rated tournaments.

Yes single games would take a lot longer than races to 7 or whatever as you need 200+ racks
 

iusedtoberich

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I didn’t have a starter “Fargo” rating. What I did have is 2 of the TD’s knew me for years and on the weekly handicapped events put on the “digital pool” and “Chollange” bracket software what they thought I would be. They also both changed it a few times. This “TD specific guess” did not report back to FargoRate. All it did was make the handicaps fair for me and my opponents on those weekly events.

Once I hit 200 games I told both TD’s I’m established and to use my real “established” FargoRate.

The rest of the events I played were all open so it didn’t matter.

Edit to add, if one of those TD’s had submitted their guess to FargoRate, I would have had a starter rating within the fargo rate system. But instead, they kept their guess, limited to the bracket software, which has nothing to do with Fargo rate.
 

iusedtoberich

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
A hugely wrong preliminary Fargo rate guess, only affects the weekly handicapped tournament. It does not affect the FargoRate system, or other players in the FargoRate system. That’s because the Fargo rate system only goes by wins and losses. It recalculates everyone’s Fargo rate every night. It doesn’t use the players Fargo rate during the actual calculation. Only wins and losses. The Fargo rate number is the output, not any input.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
A hugely wrong preliminary Fargo rate guess, only affects the weekly handicapped tournament. It does not affect the FargoRate system, or other players in the FargoRate system. That’s because the Fargo rate system only goes by wins and losses. It recalculates everyone’s Fargo rate every night. It doesn’t use the players Fargo rate during the actual calculation. Only wins and losses. The Fargo rate number is the output, not any input.
And any TD who takes unestablished ratings at face value for handicaps is likely making a mistake.
 
Top