Potential pro caliber players in APA league

[bazkook]

my opinion is in 2 parts. first this shows the weak handicapping system of apa.I havent played in apa in ten years and was a 6 ,but recently when I started playing again I went to scout the competition and what was a strong 5 years ago is a 7 now.I watched 2 7's play and one was completley out classed. So if it is easy to become a 7 witch if I play again I would become in a session easily(because of watered down 7's).So the handicap system helps (besides sandbagging) until u become a 7 then its the wild west with guys and gals alot better than eachother playing an even race.Number 2 part is in my opinion I am happy to have super strong players play on the barbox because you can learn from them,they have to play shapes differently on a BB so u can learn from them.

I agree with your comment on the weak handicapping system in APA. There are monster 7s and then there are 7s like me who struggle to compete with the monsters. There should be a decimal rating system based on games won,innings,and other statistics to further differentiate players of different skill levels.

 

[cardiac kid]

I don't really see it, as there aren't enough people in that category for it to be worthwhile. In the end they'd either be having to pay far higher dues (on a per game basis) or something else to make up for the fact that there are so few of them. Otherwise there would be nada for prize money or trips to nationals, etc. I'd be willing to bet that actively playing in APA there are probably only 4-5 players in a given league operator's area who would fall into the category you describe.

Easy,

When I played regularly as a Master in the BCAPL a decade ago, there were roughly two hundred entries. My recollection is of a high of about 250. This past year there were 50 or so players. Some past entries were moved up to the Grand Masters. Some down to Advanced. Some were moved down to the Open division after many years of frustration. Me included. Some just gave up. One thing that did change were the payouts. Fewer players equaled less prize money. Masters also pay $50 higher entry fee ($175).

Understand it is not exactly the same as your example. Both hold some water. There are just too few top players to hold a separate league, qualifier and tournament for. Till something changes, my fellow APA'ers will just have to put up with me.

Lyn

PS And hopefully learn from playing me and other top amateur players!

 

[cardiac kid]

I agree with your comment on the weak handicapping system in APA. There are monster 7s and then there are 7s like me who struggle to compete with the monsters. There should be a decimal rating system based on games won,innings,and other statistics to further differentiate players of different skill levels.

Bazkook,

There is a decimal system. Neither National APA or your local operator want to talk about it. Was told by a friendly ex-operator my number was actually closer to 7.8+. APA never allows players to see their computerized handicap number so this information may be incorrect. Think it is close to the truth. At least in my case. Now that APA is changing the scoring system for both 8 & 9 ball, might they also change the handicap system? One can only hope!

Unfortunately there will never be a fair system to rate players. Way too many variables. Some leagues only play on 9' tables. Some on 8' and some 7'. Some in bars. Some in pool rooms with the best equipment. How can they ever be equalized?

Lyn

 

[tommygunn78]

apa masters

APA Masters Division is more suited for him on a regular basis. He's not a Pro by the definition, so why not allow him to play. He's probally a 7 in 8ball and a 9 in 9ball. As for Singles events well it's apart of the league so if he's allowed to play then unfortunately he's qualified for that as well. The only defense is to keep him in his seat.

Black Cat

Its funny you say that. Im from connecticut and I have played on the masters team in my area 4 years running and out operator just told our team we cant play because he feels we are too good for our state and by no means are anyone on the team im on pro or even open players. the apa is bullshit if they cant make money they kick u out

 

[SCCues]

so here goes nothing. i don't think jeff will mind, well i hope he won't. if he does i'm sure i'll get a call.
i know jeff well. i have played on apa teams with him, he is currently on my upa 9 ball team and i have played against him in bca and apa since i moved here in 07.
jeff is a great guy and he does shoot a hell of a game. i asked him once about the whole "pro" in the amateur pool league sceario and he explained the following to me.
a guy who pulls a 40+ hour a week job (like he does) has no real shot a being a pro. they can't travel for torunaments and they can't go on the road to be a road player. they can practice limited hours - even if they own a table. so they can't put in the time a pro or raod player does. so while they may be phenominal in the league ranks, pro's pose a challenge for them.
i have gone to watch jeff play in a few open tournaments and on a given day he can win a few matches and even finish in the money, but he has to be at his best, while say shane or johnny or sean putnam can play not at thier top speed and get the win.
as to the person who posted a pro in the apa ranks can never happen, i wouldn't go that far. if the op was at the regionals this weekend i think mitch yarborough (sp?) played as well. i saw him at an apa tournament in canton GA a few months ago and watched him smoke the field. for those that don't know mitch you can look him up. he is bona fide. then there are the road players, gamblers and tournamnet finishers who play league pool. here in GA i can say jeff hooks, tim orange, jeff crawford, andy stewart, terry stewart, scott ruttinger, jason kirkus, betty sessions, dana aft, amy chen have all at one time have played or still play apa and or bca. and those are just the ones i can think of right now.
most of the apa and bca in the atlanta area that these players shoot is played on 8 or 9 ft gold crowns, kim steele or olhausens. so no "well they play small table" bs to be had.
i have posted here before and i'll say it again, i know league pool in a lot of parts of the country is shit. but there are areas, like the one i live in, where we play on good equipment, with strong players.
i'd like to say in closing, jeff beats me like a rented dog. i have posted a story here before about a guy giving me "the hand span" spot and beating my ass, jeff's that guy.

You have done a heck of a job with this post and I find it very entertaining and enlightening about top league players. I live close to the Charleston, SC area which has a huge APA league and I don't think there are any players here that can hold a candle to the players you are talking about. Thanks for the post, I enjoyed it.

James

 

[bazkook]

Bazkook,

There is a decimal system. Neither National APA or your local operator want to talk about it. Was told by a friendly ex-operator my number was actually closer to 7.8+. APA never allows players to see their computerized handicap number so this information may be incorrect. Think it is close to the truth. At least in my case. Now that APA is changing the scoring system for both 8 & 9 ball, might they also change the handicap system? One can only hope!

Unfortunately there will never be a fair system to rate players. Way too many variables. Some leagues only play on 9' tables. Some on 8' and some 7'. Some in bars. Some in pool rooms with the best equipment. How can they ever be equalized?

Lyn

I never knew about the "secret" decimal rating in APA. Sounds like a conspiracy :wink:
You're right about there being no system to fairly rate players. For example, in our league, there is one bar that plays on 8 footers, while the rest play on bar boxes. Their team name I believe is L&W Hustlers. In the recent local city championships in 9 ball, some players from other bars were complaining about the L&W Hustlers' players being under ranked. They were not under ranked. They just possessed better ball pocketing abilities from playing on the larger table.
The scoresheet has check boxes for the size of the table played on so that APA may assign them an accurate rating. If a team were to lie by claiming they played on a different size table, then that would be sandbagging.
I'm not knocking the better league players. I enjoy the challenge of playing a good player because it makes me raise the level of my play and helps me learn new things. I know it is counter productive to do so but I have played down to my opponents before and lost matches because of that. I am working on playing as consistent as possible no matter who I play. Of course I will have to play a little over my head if I'm playing someone like Shane or Johnny to even win one game! :grin:

 

[cookie man]

I never knew about the "secret" decimal rating in APA. Sounds like a conspiracy :wink:
You're right about there being no system to fairly rate players. For example, in our league, there is one bar that plays on 8 footers, while the rest play on bar boxes. Their team name I believe is L&W Hustlers. In the recent local city championships in 9 ball, some players from other bars were complaining about the L&W Hustlers' players being under ranked. They were not under ranked. They just possessed better ball pocketing abilities from playing on the larger table.
The scoresheet has check boxes for the size of the table played on so that APA may assign them an accurate rating. If a team were to lie by claiming they played on a different size table, then that would be sandbagging.
I'm not knocking the better league players. I enjoy the challenge of playing a good player because it makes me raise the level of my play and helps me learn new things. I know it is counter productive to do so but I have played down to my opponents before and lost matches because of that. I am working on playing as consistent as possible no matter who I play. Of course I will have to play a little over my head if I'm playing someone like Shane or Johnny to even win one game! :grin:

Its not a secret decimal system, its used all the time for higher level singles events.

 

[bazkook]

Its not a secret decimal system, its used all the time for higher level singles events.

Notice the parentheses around the secret in my last post. I was referring to cardiac kid's statement about the APA being tight lipped about the decimal system.
Sorry for being ignorant. My freaking bad.

 

[Celophanewrap]

You guys don't know about the secret decimal system? The APA stole it from Russia during the cold war, the KGB I think. Fate of the free world, man...

 

[bb_gun]

This is a funny post. While Jeff plays very well for an amateur and he is very difficult to beat he is not even close to pro player status. Jeff is top 10% of 7's I know but there are apa players that beat him. I do not play as well as Jeff but I am close and not afraid to play him on a 7' table. I have had several sets where my opponent only gets 1 shot, and a few times 0, the entire set and to think I am a pro is obserd. I have lost in Vegas to another 7 5-4 in 0 innings and thought nothing of it. If you cant have days like this then you are not a true 7 and you should contact Woody about your skill level. Do remember there are low, mid, and high 7's per the apa ranking. Remember someone out there probably thinks you are to good to play apa.

 

[Maniac]

I have had several sets where my opponent only gets 1 shot, and a few times 0, the entire set and to think I am a pro is obserd. I have lost in Vegas to another 7 5-4 in 0 innings and thought nothing of it.

You cannot have a 5-4 score in the APA without a few innings. If the winner of your match LOST 4 games, then he/she either missed some shots, made some early 8's, or 8-balled the wrong pocket (assuming your playing 8-ball). Either way, there had to be some innings for you to have won 4 games, due to the winners-break format the APA uses.

Not wanting to argue, but just sayin'................

Maniac

 

[Cory in DC]

You cannot have a 5-4 score in the APA without a few innings. If the winner of your match LOST 4 games, then he/she either missed some shots, made some early 8's, or 8-balled the wrong pocket (assuming your playing 8-ball). Either way, there had to be some innings for you to have won 4 games, due to the winners-break format the APA uses.

Not wanting to argue, but just sayin'................

Maniac

Theoretically, if the winner of the lag breaks and runs 4 in a row and then misses then that's half an inning. Then if the loser of the lag runs 5 in a row, you have a 5-4 win in zero innings.

I will say that the threshold for a 7 these days seems lower than what I remember from the 1990s. That could be more aggressive manual raising, better monitoring of sandbagging, or just that I play a lot better now than then and everything is relative.

Cory

 

[Maniac]

Theoretically, if the winner of the lag breaks and runs 4 in a row and then misses then that's half an inning. Then if the loser of the lag runs 5 in a row, you have a 5-4 win in zero innings.

I will say that the threshold for a 7 these days seems lower than what I remember from the 1990s. That could be more aggressive manual raising, better monitoring of sandbagging, or just that I play a lot better now than then and everything is relative.

Cory

Yeah, I'll concede that. But what are the odds this happened a "few" times as per the OP?

Maniac

 

[RFranklin]

Lower Standards

I will say that the threshold for a 7 these days seems lower than what I remember from the 1990s. That could be more aggressive manual raising, better monitoring of sandbagging, or just that I play a lot better now than then and everything is relative.

Cory, I totally agree about the lower standards. I think that the scoring system has a modified bell curve included in the skill level calculations. It would make sense because the majority of APA revenue is dependant on the masses (lower/mid level players) but there are so players now, some have to move up to keep it "fair". Also, i have heard of super 7's on the west coast in eight ball. It is a plus 1 system for their required wins.

 

[Cory in DC]

Cory, I totally agree about the lower standards. I think that the scoring system has a modified bell curve included in the skill level calculations. It would make sense because the majority of APA revenue is dependant on the masses (lower/mid level players) but there are so players now, some have to move up to keep it "fair". Also, i have heard of super 7's on the west coast in eight ball. It is a plus 1 system for their required wins.

In my experience, in a division with no legitimate 7s, the best 6 will become a 7 anyway. Once that happens, it pulls other 6s up to a 7 because they beat the over-rated 7, even as the over-rated 7 is able to hold close enough to a 50% record to stay in place. This pulls the 5s up, and so on. Once a league gets a little high, it tends to stay there. That the APA uses the best 15 of your last 30 matches to compute handicaps is part of the reason for this inertia.

For the record, I think real 7 speed starts around a middle to high B, meaning (to me) someone who is a threat to B&R a rack or two most weeks. But I see lots of 7s who are not.

On the plus side, I get to play even races with people I should probably be giving 5-4 to.

Cory

 

[bazkook]

If you cant have days like this then you are not a true 7 and you should contact Woody about your skill level. Do remember there are low, mid, and high 7's per the apa ranking. Remember someone out there probably thinks you are to good to play apa.

I don't feel like I am a true 7. I don't actually play in the Atlanta area; I play in the Middle GA league ran by Larry Herrington. Jeff and a bunch of other strong high and low ranked players came to a Singles Regionals tournament and it seems like 99% of the players from the Mid GA region were completely outclassed. I just think that APA handicapping is far too inaccurate and needs to have more criteria for judging a player. Hell some of the players in the tournament made our best 6s and 7s look like 4s and 5s.

 

[bazkook]

In my experience, in a division with no legitimate 7s, the best 6 will become a 7 anyway. Once that happens, it pulls other 6s up to a 7 because they beat the over-rated 7, even as the over-rated 7 is able to hold close enough to a 50% record to stay in place. This pulls the 5s up, and so on. Once a league gets a little high, it tends to stay there. That the APA uses the best 15 of your last 30 matches to compute handicaps is part of the reason for this inertia.

For the record, I think real 7 speed starts around a middle to high B, meaning (to me) someone who is a threat to B&R a rack or two most weeks. But I see lots of 7s who are not.

On the plus side, I get to play even races with people I should probably be giving 5-4 to.

Cory

I agree completely with your point. That was the case with me. The local league operator was always telling me I was one of the two strongest 6s in the league and that I was going up to a 7. Wouldn't you know it, I moved up to a 7 right after he got back from a conference and put in the league scores after several weeks. That was right before the tournament in question. I don't feel like I should have been in the 7s bracket based on the performance of the 7s that came from Atlanta.

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

You cannot have a 5-4 score in the APA without a few innings. If the winner of your match LOST 4 games, then he/she either missed some shots, made some early 8's, or 8-balled the wrong pocket (assuming your playing 8-ball). Either way, there had to be some innings for you to have won 4 games, due to the winners-break format the APA uses.

Not wanting to argue, but just sayin'................

Maniac

Technically, you can have a 0 inning set go 5-4. If the winner of the lag breaks and runs the first 4 games and misses, the first four games all get 0 innings. If, at this point, the opponent runs out the 5th game and proceeds to run out the remaining 4 games, there will also be 0 innings scored for the fifth game and 0 innings there after.

I do understand what you're saying but in terms of APA scoring, the scenario I described would be 5-4 finish with 0 innings.

 

[JolietJames]

THIS! and more typing so the darn thing is long enough to post...

There will always be someone better.

Shoot your best and learn how to beat them.

Sometimes you can and sometimes you can't.

Be a good winner and a good loser.

Kim

 

[Matt]

I agree completely with your point. That was the case with me. The local league operator was always telling me I was one of the two strongest 6s in the league and that I was going up to a 7. Wouldn't you know it, I moved up to a 7 right after he got back from a conference and put in the league scores after several weeks. That was right before the tournament in question. I don't feel like I should have been in the 7s bracket based on the performance of the 7s that came from Atlanta.

Comparing yourself to another 7 is not a fair way to assess whether or not you should be a 7. APA 7's range from weak B players (I've even see some APA 7's play as a C) all the way up to pro caliber players, so the question is really whether or not you are the favorite against most 6's if you were playing even. If so, you're a 7, and you're better than over 90% of the APA players.