Please help me to range these 9/10-ball handicaps
- Thread starter Vahmurka
- Start date
What kind of argument do you mean? Between us trying to figure out which is better, or between us and players? Thanks for your example of how Call 8 is tougher, by the way.
Joey, it varies depending on player's ranking. Briefly, D players play to 4 racks, C to 5, B to 6. And difference in ranking determines the handicap, i.e. racks added for a stronger player. Thus we get sets like race to 6 (evens), 7-6, 8-6 and even 9-4. You see, 13-14 racks of a match sometimes take too much time to be played. Even if we cut that to 10, that's a big difference for a large tournament.
It's been discussed on here in the past, and it seems a number of people strongly insist that the call 8 is less of a spot than the last two. I'm on the side that disagrees with that.
Having studied another portion of handicaps used around, I come with a new question.
Which is bigger handicap, 7 ball + 2 games VS 7 and 8 even?
Next comparison, 7 ball + 3 games VS 6 and 8 + 2 games?
All spots are called balls.
The reason I'm asking is that I like the chart Neil provided, but our local level of players calls for giving breaks only for A(A+) vs D level players (maybe C- too). Also I like the general concept of 2 balls given, and as the gap between players increases the first ball of two shifts towards lower balls (like 7 and 8, 6 and 8, 5 and 7).
Which is bigger handicap, 7 ball + 2 games VS 7 and 8 even?
Next comparison, 7 ball + 3 games VS 6 and 8 + 2 games?
All spots are called balls.
The reason I'm asking is that I like the chart Neil provided, but our local level of players calls for giving breaks only for A(A+) vs D level players (maybe C- too). Also I like the general concept of 2 balls given, and as the gap between players increases the first ball of two shifts towards lower balls (like 7 and 8, 6 and 8, 5 and 7).
bankoutallday
Banned
I think it really depends on the player who gets the called 8.
Are they going to pass on a medium difficulty 4 ball run to take a wild combo?
Are they smart enough to move the 8 towards a pocket on a push out, and set up an easy combo?
Will they rack the 8 behind the 9 so that it sets up in a bottom corner pocket, to create opportunities for easy combos later?
Most of my opponents, I don't mind giving the called 8 because they give up the table by trying crazy fliers all the time. That said there are those who thrive at just such shots and it can be a tough way to lose.
If you are giving game spots in short races it can be very tough on the better player. One bad roll can be the set.
I just hate that handicapping, in the end, just punishes people for improving. I have improved 4-5 levels locally over recent years, and seen guys over decades stay at the same level. Beating them spotting the 7 out and a game does provide some satisfaction.
bankoutallday
Banned
7 ball and 2 games would be bigger than the 7+8 even.
The 6 + 8 plus 2 games is pretty huge, I would play nearly any human on the planet with that one!
Spotting anything under the 7 is very random. It forces the better player to be wary of turning over the table with only a couple balls off the table.
Is the problem in your area that there are a couple really strong players that outshine the majority or just a bunch of low skilled players? One other idea to consider is making A+B side tournaments where the last 2 of the higher skill class play the last 2 of the lower skill class to see who moves into the finals. In the finals there could be additional handicaps given to the weaker player.
thanks. What about these then:
7+8 even VS 7 ball and 1 game? Next, 6 ball + 8 ball and 2 games VS 7 ball + 3 games?
Is there a way to roughly estimate how much is a rack and how much is certain ball/balls in handicapping 9-ball?
in earlier posts I quoted a system where they spot 5, 7 and the breaks!
there are a couple of world level players, many B+ to B-, and lots of A, A- players. And few Ds, of course.
...on a side note, how Call 7 & 8 are smaller spot than Call 6 only? I understand 6 ball comes in play earlier, but with two extra balls (7 and 8) there must be more possibilities for a getting player? Or do I get it wrong and Call 7 & 8 means one has to pocket BOTH of these balls?
Last edited:
I'm with you. The call 8 is a larger spot than the last two.
I think it is a mistake to introduce ball spots. If you do, be sure to write out a clear explanation of how spotting balls is handled and if you have called balls how the calling of those is handled.
I don't understand your comment that the matches are too long with game spots. Just make the matches shorter.
Each match doesn't have be perfectly fair and many handicap systems build in an advantage for the better player. Decide whether you want the maximum lop-sidedness to be 55-45 or 60-40 or even 70-30. But you need to decide this before you try to develop a system. How much fairness do you want to ensure? What bias towards the better player do you want to build in?
If you do institute ball spots, you may have to modify the spot chart. The chart posted as a PDF above has built in several assumptions, including that a one-level difference of ability (A-B or B-C match) has a constant spot (the called 7 ball). If you keep that, and you have a good rating adjustment method, the table will eventually define the levels of the players. After the ratings settle down, you may find that an A-B match favors the A player while an A-C match favors the C player. You can only determine that from the record of many matches, and only after the ratings stabilize. Since there is no theory of ball spots, it is more likely to have "warts" to take care of than a system that does have some theoretical basis.
After the ratings settle down, you may also notice that the players in the A-B-C-D levels don't correspond well with how you think of them. If that's the case, you will need to modify the table or the names you apply to the player levels.
You need a good adjustment method. It has to be systematic and open and not some committee meeting in a back room to calculate which players should get advantages. Since you refer to Elo's system, I assume you already have this in place.
I don't understand your comment that the matches are too long with game spots. Just make the matches shorter.
Each match doesn't have be perfectly fair and many handicap systems build in an advantage for the better player. Decide whether you want the maximum lop-sidedness to be 55-45 or 60-40 or even 70-30. But you need to decide this before you try to develop a system. How much fairness do you want to ensure? What bias towards the better player do you want to build in?
If you do institute ball spots, you may have to modify the spot chart. The chart posted as a PDF above has built in several assumptions, including that a one-level difference of ability (A-B or B-C match) has a constant spot (the called 7 ball). If you keep that, and you have a good rating adjustment method, the table will eventually define the levels of the players. After the ratings settle down, you may find that an A-B match favors the A player while an A-C match favors the C player. You can only determine that from the record of many matches, and only after the ratings stabilize. Since there is no theory of ball spots, it is more likely to have "warts" to take care of than a system that does have some theoretical basis.
After the ratings settle down, you may also notice that the players in the A-B-C-D levels don't correspond well with how you think of them. If that's the case, you will need to modify the table or the names you apply to the player levels.
You need a good adjustment method. It has to be systematic and open and not some committee meeting in a back room to calculate which players should get advantages. Since you refer to Elo's system, I assume you already have this in place.
Bob, thanks for your contribution and PM replies.
I understand that what can be a good spot to level C and C- will not necessarily be the same for AAA vs AA. And, we might modify that a little in future, so that the spot is constant in a certain way but depends on the level of players matched. This is what you called skill-level adjustment in a PM I believe. But I'd leave it for now, we have to start somewhere.
So to have a tool for adjustment, I'd like to know the answer to the questions I asked above, about how the spots compare. I could post our proposed "ladder" later if that helps
this is how it works now: beginners play race to 4, every next level adds a game to play against. Advanced players race to 5 and again every next level adds one. Therefore we have sets like 6-6, 8-6 and 9-7. We can't make shorter races, especially for good players. Imagine even a player of your (high to my estimation) caliber playing 9-ball race to 3 vs equal opponent. That's more like a coin toss.
You are spot on about that, we will start at where we are now (players already have ratings earned) and then the new system is supposed to re-distribute them a bit.
Yes, we use (and will use with a new system) the same approach. All the "steps" in handicaps must be constant. That is, A+ vs A, B+ vs B, C vs C- play same spot. Same story with 2, 3, 4 steps of difference between ranking levels - just like Neil's chart tells. Ratings change depending on win/lose performance, of course.
I understand that what can be a good spot to level C and C- will not necessarily be the same for AAA vs AA. And, we might modify that a little in future, so that the spot is constant in a certain way but depends on the level of players matched. This is what you called skill-level adjustment in a PM I believe. But I'd leave it for now, we have to start somewhere.
YES! And that is what I'm here with this thread for. Since I know little about ball handicaps I need to know approximately (the closer the better) how ball handicaps can be compared to games handicaps. We are going to come up with a "ladder" of constant handicaps, similar to Neil's pdf chart, but somewhat different.
So to have a tool for adjustment, I'd like to know the answer to the questions I asked above, about how the spots compare. I could post our proposed "ladder" later if that helps
Ballbangers can never get a big enough spot and will never have the courage to play in an open tournament.
still wondering if these questions have an answer at all:
Which spot is bigger: 7+8 even VS 7 ball and 1 game?
6 ball + 8 ball and 2 games VS 7 ball and 3 games?
I feel I'm a bit lost in all varieties of handicaps. The reason being I want to offer a system as good as possible, so that there is little need for big adjustments later.
Which spot is bigger: 7+8 even VS 7 ball and 1 game?
6 ball + 8 ball and 2 games VS 7 ball and 3 games?
I feel I'm a bit lost in all varieties of handicaps. The reason being I want to offer a system as good as possible, so that there is little need for big adjustments later.
Two money balls is a bigger spot than one ball and games on the wire for sure. Sinking balls on the break and combos. Heck they have a third of the rack that they can win on. I think it gets closer when saying the 7 vs the last 3 or something similar.