Questions for Mike with FargoRate

Willowbrook Wolfy said:
For the record I usually beat the 520’s to 580’s I play. I tend to lose to the sub 500’s and the 620’s to 650’s. There is one guy I always pull in tournaments that’s my kryptonite though. He’s a 650. I’m 4-28 against him in tournament play. Played a $500 set with him to 30 he won 30-20. It was tied up at 15-15 before I drank too much and everything went to shit. If you don’t believe me I’ll send you the link to our match. That’s where my Fargo should be at least 550-600. Don’t know why, but I always lose to that f’er in the tournaments.

I could understand you doubting I am a 700. I’d be skeptical myself. I just don’t understand why anybody would question me being a 600. That’s an average player in my book. I’m just saying I’m an avg player. But I do have a big gear since I used to be around a 650 20 years ago and it comes back out occasionally. Guess our definitions of avg are different
Click to expand...
He's not questioning your Fargo Rate. He's questioning your perception of how often you run out.

It's sort of reminiscent of any overheard bathroom conversation in the history of amateur pool...

"Hey -- how'd your match turn out?"

"Oh man, it was brutal. I broke and ran out. Then he broke and ran out. Then I broke and ran out. He breaks, makes a ball, flukes a ball in and runs out. Then I break dry and he runs out. I mean -- I played perfect and lost."
 
SEB said:
Everyone knows that when pros play a barbox tournament they are FAR more susceptible to an upset. That should be proof enough to sustain my point.

If Mike Page opened up his data, we’d have real verifiable data to prove my point.
Click to expand...
That's because the easier tables have the same effect as making the set shorter. Playing a pro a race to 2 vs playing a pro a race to 3. An amateur is more likely to win the race to 2. That's what the 7' vs 9' tables do. The ratings are still valid, though.
 
SEB said:
That’s wild that you think that.
Click to expand...
I grew up on only 9' GC's, nothing else was around. Recently, in the past 10 years, a bunch of local places got 7' Diamonds. Now all the players pretty much play on both, as some tournaments are on the 7', and some are on the 9'. The pecking order is EXACTLY the same on both size tables. Not an ounce different. This is in Philadelphia. Maybe it's different elsewhere, but I would bet against it. It's balls and a stick man, as Eddie says. Balls and a stick.
 
Willowbrook Wolfy said:
The guy who runs the tournaments by us told me last night he has been reporting all tournaments through December but fargorate hasn’t updated. He was wondering if the reporting to updating has been changed from right away to monthly or something. All reported through digital pool. Aw a better way to put it is if updating frequency has changed

A question I’d like answered is if a Salotto match is treated the same as a reported tournament match by fargorate. Or if they are weighed differently in the system.
Click to expand...
I emailed support a couple months ago with the same issue. A TD that had been reporting to Fargo via DigitalPool brackets for a year, suddenly the week I played was not there for over a month. Support wrote me back and informed me there was a player in the bracket missing the his last name. That made the whole bracket inadmissible. If the TD fixes it, it will then work. I asked the TD to fix, emailed back support, and it was in FargoRate in a few days. It may be the same issue.
 
nicksaint26 said:
500 is an average player 600 is an A player. And the reason I doubt your claims is you said Fargo has you at 475. People tend to overrate their game remembering themselves at their highest speed. Again I’ll trust Fargo over any individuals self claimed rating. No offense though just play in them high entry tournaments and prove me wrong.
Click to expand...
Well I’m hoping to get to derby. I have the week off from my night job already. But if there is snow in the forecast that week I have to stay home and run a plow.If there are still some openings and no snow in the forecast I will be there.

Plus I’ve said this before. I always play 600+s for cash-even. I lose more than I win playing them. All the low to mid 500’s I play want a spot from me if they play me at all. There is one guy. He is a legit 600 on the money with 2-3000 robustness. Half the time he asks me for a game. It’s not saying that I am better than him. It’s the fact if we play we usually just split sets and he is trying to guarantee himself a win(which doesn’t always happen😉). I’ll give him the spot as a challenge to myself occasionally.

500 might be an avg player. But out this way 600 would be considered avg. An avg player should hit the money occasionally and being a 500 won’t normally cut it out here. When you have 15-20 600+ fargorate players consistently joining a $20 tournament the bar for avg player goes up
 
Willowbrook Wolfy said:
Well I’m hoping to get to derby. I have the week off from my night job already. But if there is snow in the forecast that week I have to stay home and run a plow.If there are still some openings and no snow in the forecast I will be there.

Plus I’ve said this before. I always play 600+s for cash-even. I lose more than I win playing them. All the low to mid 500’s I play want a spot from me if they play me at all. There is one guy. He is a legit 600 on the money with 2-3000 robustness. Half the time he asks me for a game. It’s not saying that I am better than him. It’s the fact if we play we usually just split sets and he is trying to guarantee himself a win(which doesn’t always happen😉). I’ll give him the spot as a challenge to myself occasionally.

500 might be an avg player. But out this way 600 would be considered avg. An avg player should hit the money occasionally and being a 500 won’t normally cut it out here. When you have 15-20 600+ fargorate players consistently joining a $20 tournament the bar for avg player goes up
Click to expand...

Yet Fargo has you at 475 lol. Just curious how many games of robustness do you have?

And did you ever think that the reason players ask you for spots is because you overrate your game and spot players you shouldn’t?
 
mikepage said:
The subtlety people miss is contained here.


Yes, agreed. And yes Dennis should go for less in the Calcutta on the easier tables.

No, it doesn't. Dennis is still 126 points above those 700s on the bar table. He still wins more than 2 games for every one the 700s win. And the average score after many races to 7 will be about 7 to 3 on either table. Nothing is "equalizing" here. The difference is on the easier tables there are more table runs, more games that don't access a difference in skill because they don't have a skill-based inning change. The result of this is more VARIANCE. You will lose 7-0 more often on the easier table and you also will win a set occasionally.

To get some intuition on this, think of a 400 playing a 300 many races to 40 in straight pool. The 400 will win all of them, and the 300 won't be all that far from 20 in the individual games and will average 20

If a 750 plays a 650 many races to 40 in straight pool, the average score will still be 40 to 20. But some will be 40 to 0 and some will be won by the 650. There are far fewer skill-based changes in control when the players can run balls (or racks). That makes it act statistically like a shorter race.
Click to expand...
Anytime someone questions your math or ratings you're right on top of it. Anytime someone asks or creates a thread about your outdated app that people pay for. Crickets....
 
nicksaint26 said:
A 475 Fargo that runs out 20% of his racks on a 9 footer when he makes a ball on the break LOL. I will be looking out for you to rob all the big 550 and under tournaments this year. Shit with that runout percentage maybe even the 650 and under tournaments too. Good luck
Click to expand...

Look at the brackets. They made me play at 550 in this one. Every 50 points is a game spot
IMG_4128.png
 
As you can see my fargorate is lower than my opponents and I have to go to 5 he goes to 3. And yes I beat that 662 after but only because he had to spot me 2 games and is a nice guy. I won 3-3
 
I like fargorate. I like Mike Page. I like the fact that he defends his math with clear proof.

I like that Mike does not argue about whether his app is outdated. I like that he doesn't talk about changing this or that.

I would rather deal with something ,as it is then listen to talk about fixing this or that and it never happens.
 
Wish Mike would see this and just change me to 550 already. I emailed fargorate on it and never got a response. Asked them to adjust my rate because I can’t play at my listed rate in local tournaments.
 
Willowbrook Wolfy said:
Wish Mike would see this and just change me to 550 already. I emailed fargorate on it and never got a response. Asked them to adjust my rate because I can’t play at my listed rate in local tournaments.
Click to expand...
You’re established as a 472 with 383 games. Maybe I missed some backstory to this, but why would he change you to a 550 just because you asked?

If you want to be a 550, you’ll need to play better in Fargo-reporting tournaments or leagues.
 
The sleeper pro is still the problem.

A new player can take down opponents while hiding true speed.

The need for so many games is an inherent flaw. It takes two maybe three questions before deciding how much potential for pool someone has.

How long it takes a league to spot one is one measurement to track?

Pool needs players that can afford to stay in the game. Its like teaching, the value of education is not worth the sacrifice.

Pretend SVB enters league as unknown. How long until fargo clocks him properly. If it takes that long then its a planning tool to predict early ability.
 
Willowbrook Wolfy said:
As you can see my fargorate is lower than my opponents and I have to go to 5 he goes to 3. And yes I beat that 662 after but only because he had to spot me 2 games and is a nice guy. I won 3-3
Click to expand...
What was their explanation for that?!

From what I see you have a well established FargoRate...
 
BasementDweller said:
He's not questioning your Fargo Rate. He's questioning your perception of how often you run out.

It's sort of reminiscent of any overheard bathroom conversation in the history of amateur pool...

"Hey -- how'd your match turn out?"

"Oh man, it was brutal. I broke and ran out. Then he broke and ran out. Then I broke and ran out. He breaks, makes a ball, flukes a ball in and runs out. Then I break dry and he runs out. I mean -- I played perfect and lost."
Click to expand...
Sorry I’ve been getting defensive but that is my run out percentage over a month or two. Not my daily. I have better offense than defense. So in a 2-3 hour practice session of just playing 9 ball I’ll normally get some runouts with at least a 2 pack. Sometimes more. Sometimes I don’t break and run much for a week or two and sometimes I break and run like a champ.

About 8 months ago when I was practicing daily I had an 8 ball ERO percentage over 30% for a whole 2 month span in league. I couldn’t miss. It was some of the best pool I’ve ever played my whole life. I don’t think I can sustain that level though. Then life got hard and I got lax on practice for a while and am nowhere near that number. I’ve never had those kind of numbers before either. It was just all clicking for me. I know that might sound ridiculous. But it’s the truth.
 
DeadStick said:
You’re established as a 472 with 383 games. Maybe I missed some backstory to this, but why would he change you to a 550 just because you asked?

If you want to be a 550, you’ll need to play better in Fargo-reporting tournaments or leagues.
Click to expand...

Sorry if this offends him but he is just another guy who thinks he plays better than he really does!
 
David in FL said:
What was their explanation for that?!
Click to expand...
They say my known ability is 550+ and won’t let me play at my listed. So me saying I’m a 550-600 isn’t just my opinion. It’s also others opinions of my level. Then I come on here and everybody tries to roast me saying I’m inflating my skill.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top