Last time I played BCA, coaching was allowed... Maybe it varies from one organization to another...
FLICKit said:
Sandbaggers on APA Regionals
- Thread starter Guerra Cues
- Start date
I play APA in NJ & FL. What I've observed is the FL players are a better breed of player as a group. By simply playing a better game it would appear at first that they would be sandbaggers. Not so! If you took a APA SL4 in NJ and an APA SL4 in FL the FL player would probably beat the NJ player. So Sandbagging is not always the case although it may look like sandbagging. All players of equal APA SL are not necessarily the same skill level due to who they play against and how they play.
This appears to be so at all APA SL's. What things appear to be may not always be so.
This appears to be so at all APA SL's. What things appear to be may not always be so.
Last edited:
Damn 23 Rule
The problem is that as a 6, you would be considered a sr player (SL 6-9). UNder APA rules, you can't shoot more than 2 sr level shooters in one night. Also, the 23 rule comes into play. If you are a 6 and the team has a 9 and no other sr level shooters then you 2 account for 15 of the 23 pts.
23 rule sucks and should be raised to 25 but keep the 2 sr level shooter rule.
Str8Ball9 said:I've never had time or inclination to join a league - mostly because of the sandbagger issue. I don't know squat about APA vs. BCA etc. I've had several people ask me to join the local league including both organizers. keep in mind I show up 1-2 hours a week MAX. One said because I've never been in league I'd start as a 4. The other said that because he's seen me play there before, He'd rate me a 6. WTF?! I look at the board and 90% are 4s and 5s, a few 6s and a handful of 7-8s. I've seen most of the league players play in passing, and I'd say that they are above a 4 or 5 level (if i'm indeed a 6). I'm all for meeting the challenge of being a 6. but I don't think I need the frustration of playing someone who is equally skilled getting ball spotted and shooting to a lower count. That's FnBS! They also said that most teams wouldn't need/want me and want higher HC to play than low HC playerssomeone explain this one to me? Is the organizer telling me that for sandbagging purposes they don't want skilled players?
rant over.
The problem is that as a 6, you would be considered a sr player (SL 6-9). UNder APA rules, you can't shoot more than 2 sr level shooters in one night. Also, the 23 rule comes into play. If you are a 6 and the team has a 9 and no other sr level shooters then you 2 account for 15 of the 23 pts.
23 rule sucks and should be raised to 25 but keep the 2 sr level shooter rule.
Yeah, there's nothing you can do about that when it comes to using handicaps in regional or national competition. Heck, even in APA cities the variability of player strength in different areas can be an issue.
BCA uses no handicaps in upper level play, so it's definitely geared for stronger players.... and that's one thing I like about it. I played 9 weeks in one season and lost only 2 games and ended up as a 10. A lot of luck goes into it, especially with the timing of who breaks when you're playing the better players. I know at least one of my losses was against someone that I'd have spotted plenty in 9ball, but things just didn't go my way when I tried to run out, and I left him an open table.... dem's da breaks.
But in APA, I hated most everything about it. The rules suck, like slop counting and you having to take what you make on the break. I ended up frozen between a stripe and the rail and made a solid on the break... too bad for me - nothing like giving up ball in hand after the break.
BCA uses no handicaps in upper level play, so it's definitely geared for stronger players.... and that's one thing I like about it. I played 9 weeks in one season and lost only 2 games and ended up as a 10. A lot of luck goes into it, especially with the timing of who breaks when you're playing the better players. I know at least one of my losses was against someone that I'd have spotted plenty in 9ball, but things just didn't go my way when I tried to run out, and I left him an open table.... dem's da breaks.
But in APA, I hated most everything about it. The rules suck, like slop counting and you having to take what you make on the break. I ended up frozen between a stripe and the rail and made a solid on the break... too bad for me - nothing like giving up ball in hand after the break.
FLICKit said:
One track...
What you don't understand is that there are pluses and minuses of everything. You seem to be on a single minded track (bash APA, promote BCA, and you ignore the positives of APA, and the negatives of BCA). There are people who do that on here (maybe not you) because they have a hidden agenda.
For example, if you like open competition where the handicaps don't matter. APA does have venues for that as well. But instead of recognizing that as a positive, you'll turn it around and make it negative...
Maybe you shouldn't spend so much time in APA threads if you don't like it...
Just a suggestion...
What you don't understand is that there are pluses and minuses of everything. You seem to be on a single minded track (bash APA, promote BCA, and you ignore the positives of APA, and the negatives of BCA). There are people who do that on here (maybe not you) because they have a hidden agenda.
For example, if you like open competition where the handicaps don't matter. APA does have venues for that as well. But instead of recognizing that as a positive, you'll turn it around and make it negative...
Maybe you shouldn't spend so much time in APA threads if you don't like it...
Just a suggestion...
Last edited:
I believe that the pool as a whole is better served when people don't spend so much time bashing other parts of the pool community. Instead I favor people who spend time trying to upgrade and make pool better.
Some people can't see how to upgrade without bashing/destroying. That is often too prevalent in the pool world.
Some people can't see how to upgrade without bashing/destroying. That is often too prevalent in the pool world.
FLICKit said:
My experience with the APA and our local organizer was not good, but I know there are lots of people that like the APA. I'd love to see everyone move to another league like BCA or TAP and see the APA disappear. I don't think there's any way to "fix" the APA, especially given the amount of money generated by it, but I do know several rooms that have moved to TAP or BCA.
Well at least you're honest about your agenda...
I understand what you mean... I had some very very bad experiences in the TAP league - they've cheated, bashed and I've busted them lying many times and on top of that their system sucked, especially scoring which was unnecessarily tedious...
But sometimes, it's just better to let things go and move on...
I understand what you mean... I had some very very bad experiences in the TAP league - they've cheated, bashed and I've busted them lying many times and on top of that their system sucked, especially scoring which was unnecessarily tedious...
But sometimes, it's just better to let things go and move on...
Wow, I just looked at the TAP league rules... I've never played TAP, but it's getting quite popular here. I guess my reason for liking what I know about TAP over APA is the local operator - definitely not the rules. There are some things I like about the TAP rules over APA, but their handicap system is as bad or worse than APA(re: the tedious scorekeeping that you mentioned).
But as I've said, one of my main beefs with APA is our local operator, who treats his "customers" like crap and makes it look as though he's manipulating things to get certain teams to the top... that's not good.
BCA is just straight up pool playing. Short of having the row in hand prior to playing your game, it's very difficult to manage handicaps. And that's all you can do is manage, you can't simply lay down and win and keep a low handicap - you win, the points that determine your handicap increase. It's very straightforward and the scorekeeping is brainless. And running out is always encouraged
But as I've said, one of my main beefs with APA is our local operator, who treats his "customers" like crap and makes it look as though he's manipulating things to get certain teams to the top... that's not good.
BCA is just straight up pool playing. Short of having the row in hand prior to playing your game, it's very difficult to manage handicaps. And that's all you can do is manage, you can't simply lay down and win and keep a low handicap - you win, the points that determine your handicap increase. It's very straightforward and the scorekeeping is brainless. And running out is always encouraged
FLICKit said:
MBTaylor said:
Thanks for explaining. rep to you, sir.
Between all the rules, sandbagging, fees, and time, I'm better off paying for my table time and find a tournament/action when I feel the need to be competitive - which is rare for me these days. Think I'll concentrate on my 14.1 highrun.
I have good and bad experiences with both the APA and TAP. Neither are perfect, but both can be fun. I like the "no slop" in TAP, but we had major problems with our local operator, so much so that TAP stepped in and shut it down. Now they are trying to get it back up and operating again, but it is not going very strong right now.
I have played APA for a few years now. I enjoy it a lot. I have been to Vegas 4 times in the last 6 years, so we have done OK. I am an 8 ball SL-7, but I don't play as good as I once did, what with pushing 60 years and all...eyes and back are not what they used to be.
Worse sandbagging I ever saw was in APA in Vegas. We were in the last 16-32 field trying to make the final 8. We were ahead in the match by a couple of points going into the 4th match. We put up my son, who was a decent SL-6. The other team puts up an SL-2 (remember, they are behind in a match to advance to final 8 teams, and they had no 23 point issue). The match is a 46-19 match, with my son needing 46. They lag for break and SL-2 wins. SL-2 Breaks and runs first rack, then breaks and runs 6 balls before missing. This leaves my son needing to win 46-3 against someone with suffucient skill to break and run a rack. Needless to say, they went on to advance. We complained to the officials, but that was the only time in the tournament that that particular individual had played, so they would not address it until the individual did it for a second time.
Oh well, I still enjoy playing, but sandbagging can be an issue.
Joe
I have played APA for a few years now. I enjoy it a lot. I have been to Vegas 4 times in the last 6 years, so we have done OK. I am an 8 ball SL-7, but I don't play as good as I once did, what with pushing 60 years and all...eyes and back are not what they used to be.
Worse sandbagging I ever saw was in APA in Vegas. We were in the last 16-32 field trying to make the final 8. We were ahead in the match by a couple of points going into the 4th match. We put up my son, who was a decent SL-6. The other team puts up an SL-2 (remember, they are behind in a match to advance to final 8 teams, and they had no 23 point issue). The match is a 46-19 match, with my son needing 46. They lag for break and SL-2 wins. SL-2 Breaks and runs first rack, then breaks and runs 6 balls before missing. This leaves my son needing to win 46-3 against someone with suffucient skill to break and run a rack. Needless to say, they went on to advance. We complained to the officials, but that was the only time in the tournament that that particular individual had played, so they would not address it until the individual did it for a second time.
Oh well, I still enjoy playing, but sandbagging can be an issue.
Joe
A two runs 15 balls? Normally a two has trouble running a single ball. I wish our fives and six sould do as well.Bamacues said:
Teams that have players like this keep them under cover by not playing them until they absolutly need them. Seen it many times. When the officials finally do something about certain players its to late for many teams they had already beat.
The match system in APA has changed since I played. When I played, it was a matter of winning a number of games based on your handicap, not the number of balls you make. I think the new way is a little more fair, but any system that uses innings as a way of determining skill level is fundamentally flawed and subject to easy manipulation.
Sandbagging can be done in BCA, but really only if you've already got the "row" in hand and can stop making balls when you no longer need them to get the point for that row. And as you've pointed out, the league operator has a lot to do with how fair and enjoyable the local league is... but once you advance beyond that, beware of the snakes
As for the 2 running a rack, it really sucks that they don't do something about it then and there. A 2 should NEVER run a rack, but usually those teams end up getting DQ'ed when the sandbagger gets bumped(at least that's how it worked when I played APA).
Sandbagging can be done in BCA, but really only if you've already got the "row" in hand and can stop making balls when you no longer need them to get the point for that row. And as you've pointed out, the league operator has a lot to do with how fair and enjoyable the local league is... but once you advance beyond that, beware of the snakes
As for the 2 running a rack, it really sucks that they don't do something about it then and there. A 2 should NEVER run a rack, but usually those teams end up getting DQ'ed when the sandbagger gets bumped(at least that's how it worked when I played APA).
Bamacues said:
dabarbr said:
This is exactly what happened to my 9-ball team in the '06 Team Championships. We ended up 9th or so overall but was knocked out by a team that was later disqualified for "sandbagging." The APA ended up giving some of the teams which were beat by the disqual'd team a portion of the $$ that was going to go to them. They did invite us back for 2007 as long as certain criteria were met for the 2007 season (i.e. 5 of 7 original member, finish in top 4 of division, etc...). Anyways, it was unfortunate... but it is what it is. I'd do it all over again. The vegas experience was awesome.
Regards,
so an average player.. who realizes the team made it to Vegas... dedicates himself to that... works his butt off ... raises his game a ball or two.. impressing everyone with his hard earned new skill.....
nah he's just a bagger... he was faking it all year....
how do you tell the difference?
nah he's just a bagger... he was faking it all year....
how do you tell the difference?
softshot said:
You don't. Although there are some glaring differences between that and other stories in this thread, you simply can't tell if someone is sandbagging unless an Sl 2 runs 2 or 3 racks on you. But other than extremes you just don't know, I don't care what anybody says.
Thing with the APA system is, your handicap is based pretty much solely on your results against the other players in your area - which is a tiny fraction of the total amount of players playing APA.
Someone who is a 5 in one area could move to somewhere else and get on a team - and find that the 4s, even the 3s, play as well as he does - because the average level of play in that new area is higher than his old area.
I experienced this just the other day. There's a bar/restaurant near my house, the house I recently moved back to (where I grew up), they have a couple of bar boxes that they open up on Monday nights, and I usually go there, have myself a tasty meal and beverage, and shoot free pool. Most nights its bangers in there, and I happily school them.
But last Monday, I ran across an older fellow in there, with his own cue... watched him finish up a rack while I got my gear out, and thought "FINALLY, somoene who can shoot!" I noticed he had an APA patch sewn on his shirt sleeve, we got to talking about that. I asked what his handicap was. He said he was a 3.
"A *three*???" I thought to myself. The 3s back where I was playing, in Colorado, don't shoot like THIS guy! He was making most of his shots, playing good position, good cue ball control, etc. Granted, he wasn't 100% getting out, he almost always found a way to goof up a run-out, but still...
But - I've noticed since I've been back in Atlanta, playing tournaments etc., that the average level of play here seems to be higher than in Colorado. Hence, its entirely possible this guy could be a 3 and be playing as well as he does. The APA system doesn't set handicaps based on your skill - it sets handicaps based on your results.
You could have one player who, in one inning, runs down to the eight ball on every game and shanks it - and gives away all his games/matches - and another player who can hardly sink a ball, but plays against people like the first guy - i.e. folks who give away games all the time - and the second guy will end up with a higher handicap than the first guy, despite being a far worse player.
Someone who is a 5 in one area could move to somewhere else and get on a team - and find that the 4s, even the 3s, play as well as he does - because the average level of play in that new area is higher than his old area.
I experienced this just the other day. There's a bar/restaurant near my house, the house I recently moved back to (where I grew up), they have a couple of bar boxes that they open up on Monday nights, and I usually go there, have myself a tasty meal and beverage, and shoot free pool. Most nights its bangers in there, and I happily school them.
But last Monday, I ran across an older fellow in there, with his own cue... watched him finish up a rack while I got my gear out, and thought "FINALLY, somoene who can shoot!" I noticed he had an APA patch sewn on his shirt sleeve, we got to talking about that. I asked what his handicap was. He said he was a 3.
"A *three*???" I thought to myself. The 3s back where I was playing, in Colorado, don't shoot like THIS guy! He was making most of his shots, playing good position, good cue ball control, etc. Granted, he wasn't 100% getting out, he almost always found a way to goof up a run-out, but still...
But - I've noticed since I've been back in Atlanta, playing tournaments etc., that the average level of play here seems to be higher than in Colorado. Hence, its entirely possible this guy could be a 3 and be playing as well as he does. The APA system doesn't set handicaps based on your skill - it sets handicaps based on your results.
You could have one player who, in one inning, runs down to the eight ball on every game and shanks it - and gives away all his games/matches - and another player who can hardly sink a ball, but plays against people like the first guy - i.e. folks who give away games all the time - and the second guy will end up with a higher handicap than the first guy, despite being a far worse player.
The one thing that tends to keep APA handicaps fairly consistent across regions is the fact that innings are used to determine handicap.
If the 2nd player in your scenario finishes up all of those "given" games in an inning or two, that will be reflected in his handicap. But if it takes him 4-5 innings(or if he lays down), that will keep his HC low.
If the 2nd player in your scenario finishes up all of those "given" games in an inning or two, that will be reflected in his handicap. But if it takes him 4-5 innings(or if he lays down), that will keep his HC low.
ScottW said:Thing with the APA system is, your handicap is based pretty much solely on your results against the other players in your area - which is a tiny fraction of the total amount of players playing APA.
Someone who is a 5 in one area could move to somewhere else and get on a team - and find that the 4s, even the 3s, play as well as he does - because the average level of play in that new area is higher than his old area.
I experienced this just the other day. There's a bar/restaurant near my house, the house I recently moved back to (where I grew up), they have a couple of bar boxes that they open up on Monday nights, and I usually go there, have myself a tasty meal and beverage, and shoot free pool. Most nights its bangers in there, and I happily school them.
But last Monday, I ran across an older fellow in there, with his own cue... watched him finish up a rack while I got my gear out, and thought "FINALLY, somoene who can shoot!" I noticed he had an APA patch sewn on his shirt sleeve, we got to talking about that. I asked what his handicap was. He said he was a 3.
"A *three*???" I thought to myself. The 3s back where I was playing, in Colorado, don't shoot like THIS guy! He was making most of his shots, playing good position, good cue ball control, etc. Granted, he wasn't 100% getting out, he almost always found a way to goof up a run-out, but still...
But - I've noticed since I've been back in Atlanta, playing tournaments etc., that the average level of play here seems to be higher than in Colorado. Hence, its entirely possible this guy could be a 3 and be playing as well as he does. The APA system doesn't set handicaps based on your skill - it sets handicaps based on your results.
You could have one player who, in one inning, runs down to the eight ball on every game and shanks it - and gives away all his games/matches - and another player who can hardly sink a ball, but plays against people like the first guy - i.e. folks who give away games all the time - and the second guy will end up with a higher handicap than the first guy, despite being a far worse player.