Recent Facebook banter regarding fargo

[boogieman]

"handicapped" = lets everyone play. Everyone has a chance.

Not disagreeing with your post, but even in handicapped events it's usually the better players/higher rated that win. They can outrun the nuts. To be a high rated player they have figured out how to dig deep when needed. Even when the handicap is fair, the better player usually wins. Champion mindset > a spot almost every time.

That and the fact it's almost always not handicapped evenly. Someone who has to win 2 on a race to 5 has no chance. It can happen but it's not too often that someone going to 3 wins a race to 5 either.

Generally where I play it's races to 5. Sometimes women are automatically given a race on the wire. I got beat 4-4 by a hotshot female player, who is probably 100+ FR higher than me and I had to spot her 1 game on a race to 5. I didn't know about the spot at the time. I had clawed my way back from 2-3 and was at 4-3 me. She won that game and I said, "Nice we have an exciting hill-hill match!" She looked at me and says, "No I won." Heck of a time to find out about a gender based spot not aligning with skill at all! I'm still a bit salty about that one, not that knowing ahead of time would have made a difference. I'm out here fighting for my life against someone who should win the set 2X over me and I have to spot her!

 

[maha]

Handicaps in a tournament are for the guys that won't take their skirt off and play anyone even. Years ago if you asked for a spot, they'd tell you to go to the Boy's Club and play.

yea that is true. and those people then went to their chair to sit and watch others play and gamble and have fun or make money or both.

 

[maha]

first off, there is no such things as out running the nuts.

but a fair tournament set up is where the winning and losing players in each match up is solely determined by:

1. the one that played better than his normal speed
2. the one playing worse than his normal speed
3. the benefactors of the luck in the game.

no one should win because they are simply better before the game even started. that is the way things mostly are and why in pool most lose interest in playing in competition.

 

[ctyhntr]

Can the state lists be share here, please?View attachment 849027

Ask @mikepage if he can post the state lists here.

 

[sjm]

Yes, APA is a good example of blending players over a wide skill range so they can have effective actual competition.

Beyond that, though, we tend to exaggerate how prevalent handicapping is amongst serious players in USA. And we have this fantasy that handicapping doesn't happen elsewhere, like in Europe.

I show two things here. The first is the final 32 for this year's Interpool Open. You will recognize some of the names that have (0) after them. That number is where they start in a race to 11. It's not that this is a usual tournament; It's that there are a handful like this. And many of the top European players have handicapped tournaments like this in their records. The equivalent just doesn't happen in US, and there is no good reason for that.

The second is Alex Kazakis's tournaments in Cuescore over a few month period. You can see there are lots of handicapped tournaments, and they have players of all levels. And they get to draw a top world class player in a local event in a format where they just might win.


View attachment 849247View attachment 849246

Yes, a few handicap events exist at a higher level of play, but at least to this point, almost no event producers have gone this route, suggesting to me that they do not see it as a money maker. Even so, single night weekly handicap tourneys exist in pool halls all over America.

 

[fastone371]

Handicaps in a tournament are for the guys that won't take their skirt off and play anyone even. Years ago if you asked for a spot, they'd tell you to go to the Boy's Club and play.

Yeah right, absolutely, got it. So college football players should take their skirts off a play in the NFL, same with minor league baseball and college, right? They should be playing in the majors too. I always thought it was a sham that golfers needed to tour card to play professionally. When is Augusta anyhoo, I have not picked up my clubs in 20 years and have only played about 15 rounds in my life but I think I have a shot at the green jacket.

 

[mikepage]

Ask @mikepage if he can post the state lists here.

Those lists are live in the APP, and they change every day. I'm pretty sure every single one of them has changed from the snapshots we posted for the purpose of cleaning up names/locations.

 

[SEB]

720 has always been the unofficial bar for pro level.

 

[skor]

In rotation games, a handicap system that is based on uneven games that are needed to win simply doesn't work. the stronger player will always win. This system is good for 8 ball only.
In short races, the weaker player may get lucky, but in races longer than 5, no chance in hell.

Giving certain balls also in my opinion doesn't work and it's more of a hustler move (and again, one can get lucky in a single game or a sort race).

The APA system of getting points for balls made is the smarter handicap system out there for rotation in my opinion. The Chinese Duya (9ball version) also uses a points system so it is easier to handicap if needed.

That's on of my issues with Fargo, the handicap system just won't work for 9ball or 10ball.

As some posts here suggest, the main issue is players attitude, good players (600-700) don't really wants to go through the hustle of a tournament and prefer a fast money game, so whatever solution the promoters may suggest, it won't sell.
Still, the attitude for the game is off pass-time game of a gambling game, not a sport.

 

[sjm]

In rotation games, a handicap system that is based on uneven games that are needed to win simply doesn't work. the stronger player will always win.

Not sure I follow this. If you are saying that existing handicap systems tend not to give the weaker player enough games on the wire in rotation pool, that's one thing. If, on the other hand, you are suggesting that it's impossible to devise a handicapping method that awards the correct number of games on the wire to the weaker player for a match to be a 50/50 proposition, I strongly disagree.

 

[skor]

Not sure I follow this. If you are saying that existing handicap systems tend not to give the weaker player enough games on the wire in rotation pool, that's one thing. If, on the other hand, you are suggesting that it's impossible to devise a handicapping method that awards the correct number of games on the wire to the weaker player for a match to be a 50/50 proposition, I strongly disagree.

a weak player won't run 9 balls and out.
most likely he'll leave a strong player less balls to run out...
yeah, he may fluke a 9 on the break or just in a wild shot and even might get a win if a stronger player chocks on the last couple of balls but he won't do it 5 times.
So a race to 2 or 3 he might win but not something longer than that.

 

[sjm]

a weak player won't run 9 balls and out.
most likely he'll leave a strong player less balls to run out...
yeah, he may fluke a 9 on the break or just in a wild shot and even might get a win if a stronger player chocks on the last couple of balls but he won't do it 5 times.
So a race to 2 or 3 he might win but not something longer than that.

Gotcha. We are clearly considering very different levels of play here. It a 725 Fargo plays a 785 Fargo with two on the wire going to nine, both will run out some of the racks, but the higher rater player will do so more consistently. At lower levels of play, it is a different discussion.

I feel strongly that Fargo works well at the highest levels of play, but I have no idea whether it works at lower levels of play. Your experience says it does not.

 

[skor]

Gotcha. We are clearly considering very different levels of play here. It a 725 Fargo plays a 785 Fargo with two on the wire going to nine, both will run out some of the racks, but the higher rater player will do so more consistently. At lower levels of play, it is a different discussion.

I feel strongly that Fargo works well at the highest levels of play, but I have no idea whether it works at lower levels of play. Your experience says it does not.

if I understand the Fargo handicap system correctly, then for a 100 point difference, the handicap is twice the games.
So in a 9ball match, a race to 9, an 800 player will need to win 9 while a 700 player will need to win 4. this is definitely going to go for the 700 player.
But same race between a 600 and 500 players and it'll go for the 600 players.
So I don't think that this system is working at all at high level of play.
might work for under 500 players.

The last Texas open early stages showed many matches that ended 9-0 or 9-1 or 9-2 but it wasn't like the weak players didn't get table time and didn't pot balls, they just couldn't run out.
This clearly shows that giving games as handicap in rotation games won't help the weaker player.
Only a points per balls made system can work well.

I 8ball it's a different story and giving games works well.

14.1 should be points ans a match is one game

I'm not that familiar with One Pocket or Bank pool to have any opinion what system will work there, but I'm guessing points will work better.

This clearly shows me that the Fargo Rating are not just not working for handicap, they also can't work for all games.
It also can't work for all gender, if you take a woman that only plays women events and she get to be a 700, there is no way that she is at the same level as a 700 man who competes at all the pro/open/major events.

I look at the Fargo rating of players just a general idea of how strong a player may play, might work for money games or 8ball but not for anything else. Pro don't need it as they don't do handicap events, they just use it for gambling...
I don't know or think that there is a better rating system out there and I guess that something is better than nothing.

 

[lfigueroa]

Gotcha. We are clearly considering very different levels of play here. It a 725 Fargo plays a 785 Fargo with two on the wire going to nine, both will run out some of the racks, but the higher rater player will do so more consistently. At lower levels of play, it is a different discussion.

I feel strongly that Fargo works well at the highest levels of play, but I have no idea whether it works at lower levels of play. Your experience says it does not.

Garbage in, garbage out.

Lou Figueroa
just sayin'

 

[Johnson]

Gotcha. We are clearly considering very different levels of play here. It a 725 Fargo plays a 785 Fargo with two on the wire going to nine, both will run out some of the racks, but the higher rater player will do so more consistently. At lower levels of play, it is a different discussion.

I feel strongly that Fargo works well at the highest levels of play, but I have no idea whether it works at lower levels of play. Your experience says it does not.

I follow a lot of the split bracket tourneys and the 760+ players tend to avoid them minus Rob Saez. Roland IIRC won one of the JOB's tourneys but Bergman played last month and I don't think he won (both go to 13, a 600 fargo would go to like 5, 630 6, etc). These tourneys tend to be won by the low side as much or more than the high side which would go against common sense especially when there could be over 6 figures to play for that should aid the pro not the other way around!

The calcuttas can last for 2 - 3 hours alone and the tourney will be all day sat and LATE into sun which the length you'd assume would benefit the better more seasoned players but you'd be surprised! Indy has several smaller 100ish player split bracket tourneys and Beckley got 3rd or 4th in the last one and he ran a 5 or 6 pack on a Diamond bar table right before the final 4! A guy from the low side manipulated his Fargo because he had 2 names in the system like a 515 and a 540 and he split nearly $6000 for 1st/2nd.

 

[sjm]

I follow a lot of the split bracket tourneys and the 760+ players tend to avoid them minus Rob Saez. Roland IIRC won one of the JOB's tourneys but Bergman played last month and I don't think he won (both go to 13, a 600 fargo would go to like 5, 630 6, etc). These tourneys tend to be won by the low side as much or more than the high side which would go against common sense especially when there could be over 6 figures to play for that should aid the pro not the other way around!

Interesting. Thanks for sharing this.

 

[BasementDweller]

Gotcha. We are clearly considering very different levels of play here. It a 725 Fargo plays a 785 Fargo with two on the wire going to nine, both will run out some of the racks, but the higher rater player will do so more consistently. At lower levels of play, it is a different discussion.

I feel strongly that Fargo works well at the highest levels of play, but I have no idea whether it works at lower levels of play. Your experience says it does not.

I think it works at the higher levels of play for the most part. I do think it can fall apart at times based on the game, as some top pros can get so close to mastery that a player only 50 FR points below them can get beat more handedly than expected.

For instance with the WNT format, the top players really have the break dialed in. So someone like SVB can threaten to run multiple racks, while the 750 or 775 may not have the break down. Same thing with 10 ball. A few of these games can take a 50 point difference and make it look much greater.

 

[Johnson]

Interesting. Thanks for sharing this.

Dr Dave should do a yearly review on all the main split bracket tourneys and which fargos tend to have the best odds of winning. I despise handicap tourneys but the split brackets are fascinating and only possible because of Fargo! There's also a TON of 600 - 720 fargo gambling matches now and most are sets for $500+ and there were 2 500 fargos playing for $500 or $1000 on the Indy stream a few weeks back which is nuts!!

There was a big 1250 and under scotch fargo tourney in Fort Wayne last weekend with a lot of teams, scotch capped and team capped events are also fascinating the Toledo area is copying Fort Wayne. You get to see players you normally wouldn't compete for thousands on the live stream which is great!

 

[mikepage]

I follow a lot of the split bracket tourneys and the 760+ players tend to avoid them minus Rob Saez. Roland IIRC won one of the JOB's tourneys but Bergman played last month and I don't think he won (both go to 13, a 600 fargo would go to like 5, 630 6, etc). These tourneys tend to be won by the low side as much or more than the high side which would go against common sense especially when there could be over 6 figures to play for that should aid the pro not the other way around!

Here are Bergmans games in the last 6 months against opponents under 625. These opponents have a (game weighted) average of 582. Nothing surprising here.

Many of these tournaments are in a part of the country where FargoRate is pretty unestablished. What that means in practice is many but not all of the strong players will be on our radar and we'll do a reasonable job getting them in the ballpark. But as you go down in skill, our view can get pretty thin. Many are not on our radar at all and those who are have ratings that are not so reliable because the network is not strong. [Interestingly, the network gets strong by including the very games people argue should be excluded from FargoRate].

What that means for these big split bracket tournaments is that those finishing high on the low side tend to be somewhat stronger players flying under the various radars. I think for some of these tournaments, particularly with calcuttas, that's kind of a feature and not a bug.

 

[Johnson]

Here are Bergmans games in the last 6 months against opponents under 625. These opponents have a (game weighted) average of 582. Nothing surprising here.

Many of these tournaments are in a part of the country where FargoRate is pretty unestablished. What that means in practice is many but not all of the strong players will be on our radar and we'll do a reasonable job getting them in the ballpark. But as you go down in skill, our view can get pretty thin. Many are not on our radar at all and those who are have ratings that are not so reliable because the network is not strong. [Interestingly, the network gets strong by including the very games people argue should be excluded from FargoRate].

What that means for these big split bracket tournaments is that those finishing high on the low side tend to be somewhat stronger players flying under the various radars. I think for some of these tournaments, particularly with calcuttas, that's kind of a feature and not a bug.

View attachment 849559

Is that because of selective reporting or just the lack of reporting in general? Do you have a map of more/less established Fargo areas or any reasoning why X region is or Y an Z region aren't?

Were you made aware of the Indy split bracket issue I think in July? There was a new player and the TD didn't ask any other TD's to confirm the new player's Fargo and they got in based off of their lower Fargo instead of the higher Fargo and split 1st/2nd. What do you do on your end to prevent multiple Fargos for the same player? Is there any type of Fargo ID that could be added?