Some comments about the "thread within the thread" that seems to have developed.
I'll start off by saying that I am a long time APA player, as a 7 for the last four years and as a 6 for four years before that.
I have never been a big fan of the APA's handicapping system, and in fact have communicated this to their main office on more than one occasion. I think the primary problem with it is that it is designed to get more players to join the APA, and once in to stay in long enough to give it a chance. They do this at the expense (at least to some extent) of accurately ranking players according to their actual skill level. New players stay at lower ranks far longer than they should in many cases.
I can't tell you how many times I have seen teams composed of primarily "new to league" players win sessions. A few sessions ago, we had an entirely new team (all 8 guys) join and promptly win both the regular season and playoffs. I personally saw them play on 3 different occasions, and they were all basicly young & inexperienced, not baggers who turned it up when they needed to. At the end of this session, though, after their team won more matches than any of the other 15 league teams, not one single player was ranked higher than his initial 4 handicap (and 5 of the 8 were ranked lower). That's just ridiculous in my opinion.
At one point recently I was in email contact with the main office over a handicap issue, and relayed some opinions on improving their system. I made the point that "wins & losses, innings & defensive shots" were not enough information to accurately judge the way a match was played. I suggested borrowing some things that I like about TAP such as "balls left on the table." I was informed that "more things than you know go into the handicap system." What "more things?" I've been filling out the scoresheets for 8 years, and there are no "more things" (at least none related to a player's skill at the table). I asked about this but never received a reply.
I have lost to 2s and 3s. Not often, but it has happened. I won't go as far as to say they were all accurately ranked, but even if they were it can happen. My wife is a 2 and pretty bad, but she runs 5 balls on rare occasions. When you only need 2 games it's not that much of a stretch. Realisticly though, how often do 2s and 3s play against 6s and 7s? Personally, as a 7, I try to avoid it as much as possible. There are a number of reasons, not the least of which are that it's boring and unchallenging.
I prefer TAP these days, primarily because the APA (at least in my area) is geared toward the lower ranked player. TAP allows 2 extra team handicap points and TAP handicaps are generally a skill level lower than the APA to start. You can field an entire TAP team of APA 6s within their 25 rule. This being the case, there isn't a whole lot of call for APA 2, 3 or even 4 caliber players. Again, this is what I have seen locally. Personally I find this to be a lot more enjoyable and entertaining. Almost all of the matches involve players that are at least decent enough to keep your attention. IMO, there's nothing quite as mind-numbing as having to sit through a couple APA matches per league night where 2s and 3s endlessly bang balls around the table to no avail. As a "better" player, I just find this boring, not to mention the fact that it seems to take forever.
I had some other points I was going to make, but my fingers are already numb so I'll save them for another time.
Chris
I'll start off by saying that I am a long time APA player, as a 7 for the last four years and as a 6 for four years before that.
I have never been a big fan of the APA's handicapping system, and in fact have communicated this to their main office on more than one occasion. I think the primary problem with it is that it is designed to get more players to join the APA, and once in to stay in long enough to give it a chance. They do this at the expense (at least to some extent) of accurately ranking players according to their actual skill level. New players stay at lower ranks far longer than they should in many cases.
I can't tell you how many times I have seen teams composed of primarily "new to league" players win sessions. A few sessions ago, we had an entirely new team (all 8 guys) join and promptly win both the regular season and playoffs. I personally saw them play on 3 different occasions, and they were all basicly young & inexperienced, not baggers who turned it up when they needed to. At the end of this session, though, after their team won more matches than any of the other 15 league teams, not one single player was ranked higher than his initial 4 handicap (and 5 of the 8 were ranked lower). That's just ridiculous in my opinion.
At one point recently I was in email contact with the main office over a handicap issue, and relayed some opinions on improving their system. I made the point that "wins & losses, innings & defensive shots" were not enough information to accurately judge the way a match was played. I suggested borrowing some things that I like about TAP such as "balls left on the table." I was informed that "more things than you know go into the handicap system." What "more things?" I've been filling out the scoresheets for 8 years, and there are no "more things" (at least none related to a player's skill at the table). I asked about this but never received a reply.
I have lost to 2s and 3s. Not often, but it has happened. I won't go as far as to say they were all accurately ranked, but even if they were it can happen. My wife is a 2 and pretty bad, but she runs 5 balls on rare occasions. When you only need 2 games it's not that much of a stretch. Realisticly though, how often do 2s and 3s play against 6s and 7s? Personally, as a 7, I try to avoid it as much as possible. There are a number of reasons, not the least of which are that it's boring and unchallenging.
I prefer TAP these days, primarily because the APA (at least in my area) is geared toward the lower ranked player. TAP allows 2 extra team handicap points and TAP handicaps are generally a skill level lower than the APA to start. You can field an entire TAP team of APA 6s within their 25 rule. This being the case, there isn't a whole lot of call for APA 2, 3 or even 4 caliber players. Again, this is what I have seen locally. Personally I find this to be a lot more enjoyable and entertaining. Almost all of the matches involve players that are at least decent enough to keep your attention. IMO, there's nothing quite as mind-numbing as having to sit through a couple APA matches per league night where 2s and 3s endlessly bang balls around the table to no avail. As a "better" player, I just find this boring, not to mention the fact that it seems to take forever.
I had some other points I was going to make, but my fingers are already numb so I'll save them for another time.
Chris
