sjm said:
Assuming twenty is the max:
D 2
D+ 3
C 5
C+ 6
B 7
B+ 9
A 11
A+ 12
Open 14
Pro 16+
I've been doing EO for years, and once you multiply these by 10 to correspond to normal EO scores, I'd say these are right about on target with what I associate with the letter rankings.
I average about 10 per inning, perhaps 10.5, on a moderately tight 9-ft table (Gabriels). On this table, I've probably done it 150 times, meaning 1500 innings. When I reach 20, I mark it as 20 for the purposes of keeping the EO score, but I continue on and record the result. Out of that 1500 tries, I've reaches 20 about 150 times and I've been in the 40's a handful of times. While I have no runs in the 50s and no runs in the 60s, I did one time, on my first inning half awake in the morning, run 70. (People who do EO a lot tend to have high runs that are multiples of 14 ;-))
Anyway, it's a good practice game. Keep records!
Here is an old (1999) RSB post where I introduce a new game that is now called FARGO (see
www.playpool.com/rsbasp/fargo). It is an alternative to EO that borrows from the Hopkins Q skill test (where you start with 15 balls each inning and hit in the first 10 in any order and the last five in rotation)
mike page
fargo
*************************
old post from the dark side ;-)
**************************
I have an idea for an alternative test to use for a standardized rating.
Here are some of what I think are desirable features in such a test.
1. * simple rules
2. * takes a short amount of time
3. * measures a mix of skills
4. * is a good test for beginning through pro-level players
5. * does not have a big chance component
6. * has no major strategy/skill component unique to the game
Equal Offense and Q-skill each have some of these features and fail at
others. *Before saying my new idea (skip to the bottom if you're
impatient), I'll say how I think EO and QS do on these measures. *
1. * SIMPLE RULES
EO rules are simple. *QS rules are mostly simple but after-the-break
options are complicated.
2. * TAKES A SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME
*EO takes me 45 minutes while QS takes me 30 minutes. *That's a big
advantage of QS if all else was equal.
3. * MEASURES A MIX OF SKILLS
EO measures 14.1 skills, (including opening up new racks, a specialized
skill . These includes seeing patterns, avoiding cue ball trouble, soft
shots, little cue ball movement, breaking up clusters etc. * Q-skill
measures a mix of 14.1 and rotation (9-ball) skills. *The *rotation
component of QS adds a lot: tougher shots, hitting harder, multi-rail
position, etc.
4. IS A GOOD TEST FOR BEGINNERS THROUGH PRO-LEVEL
EO and QS are both good tests for beginning players. *In fact players who
average less than 40 or 50 or so are doing almost the same test. *Both are
progressive (get harder as you go) in the sense that you are only trying
the tougher component (opening up a new rack in EO or running balls in
rotation in QS) if you first succeeded at the easier component (hitting in
a bunch of balls in any order). *Both are good for intermediate players
too. *Both fail, however, for strong players. *Maxing out an inning of
either game is too easy for these to be *good skill tests for strong
players. *The scores for players who max out two thirds or more of their
innings are determined by rare screwups, so this is an inefficient way to
distinguish a middle-of-the pack touring pro from efren, for example.
5. * DOES NOT HAVE A BIG CHANCE COMPONENT
Chance components average out in the long run, but that--the 'long
run'--is the problem. *In a skill test you don't want to wait for the long
run. *Reducing the chance component where possible allows the testee to
zero in on his true average more quickly. *The
zero-points-for-scratch-on-the -break in the MM Q test is an example of
this. *It introduces more variations in a person's score and so is bad for
a skill test.
************
The following idea removes, imo, many of the deficiencies of EO and QS
mentioned above.
****MY IDEA****
In a nutshell, it's similar to the Q-test with one major variation: switch
to rotation whenever you choose.
______________________________ _______
play 10 innings. *
Place a coin heads up on the rail; turn the coin tails up to switch to
rotation mode. *Balls pocketed before switching to rotation score 1 point;
balls pocketed in rotation component score two points each. *
Open break; no penalty for scratch.
Spot balls pocketed on break.
Start with bih anywhere on table.
call shot for everything.
Foul (scratch or no rail) ends inning. *
Only balls pocketed on legal shot score points. *Extra balls pocketed
score 'at the going rate.'
______________________________ _________
So a beginning player will do basically never switch to rotation. *An
intermediate player might switch to rotation after about 10 balls (after
fewer on a particularly good table or more on a tough table). *A strong
player might just take a few shots to knock balls into the clear and then
switch to rotation. Ten rounds of this would separate efren from the
middle-of-the-pack pro just fine. *All my proposed rules have some
justification interms of the desirable features listed above.
--
m
