TAR 34 8-Ball / 10-Ball Shot-by-Shot Statistics

[Pool-Trax]

:yeah: Results and Statistics are Online Now! :yeah:

Click Here (8-Ball) to View the Official Pool-Trax
Shot-by-Shot Match Statistics
and Rack-by-Rack Results.

Click Here (10-Ball) to View the Official Pool-Trax
Shot-by-Shot Match Statistics
and Rack-by-Rack Results.

Here are additional links to each player's Player-Trax containing stats from various matches and events featuring Pool-Trax Shot-by-Shot Statistics:
Efren Reyes Shane Van Boening

Over 6,300 Racks of 8-Ball, 9-Ball, & 10-Ball with Full Shot-by-Shot Statistics and Rack-by-Rack Results.
We are always looking to add new features and stats for your analyzing pleasure; please feel free to let us know what statistics you'd like to see.​

 

[AtLarge]

Good work for sure!

How does your Performance Rating differ from Accu-Stats' Total Performance Average? I couldn't find an explanation of the Performance Rating formula on your site.

 

[Pool-Trax]

Good work for sure!

How does your Performance Rating differ from Accu-Stats' Total Performance Average? I couldn't find an explanation of the Performance Rating formula on your site.

Great question, AtLarge. The formula created to generate our Performance Rating is similar in format to an Accu-Stats rating, with a couple notable differences. The main difference is that we do not record "unforced errors". While this has become a standard term to most and is well understood, I felt that it left too much room for (what I'd call) subjective statistics. Let me explain my reasoning.
While in most situations all would agree on what shot would be considered an unforced error, I've noticed that in some circumstances a particular shot may be viewed by some as an error while others may disagree. Something as minor as a statistician's point of view may lead them to mark the shot one way versus another. While there is generally a consensus of what the correct result of any one shot should be, the fact that two different people can generate two different Accu-Stats ratings for the same match seems to be less than proficient for our goal - therefore we decided to not use an "unforced error" when generating our Pool-Trax Performance Rating.
Also of notable difference, we have placed more of an emphasis on the break; in our rating system it does not hold the value of a single (regular) shot. The penalty for fouls (especially on the break) is also heavier weighted.
With all this being said I urge our guests to look beyond just the performance rating when checking the stats. While I've found this to be a great, quick look at players' performances, a true analysis is best done with the statistics provided in addition to the Pool-Trax Performance Rating.

 

[AtLarge]

Great question, AtLarge. The formula created to generate our Performance Rating is similar in format to an Accu-Stats rating, with a couple notable differences. The main difference is that we do not record "unforced errors". While this has become a standard term to most and is well understood, I felt that it left too much room for (what I'd call) subjective statistics. Let me explain my reasoning.
While in most situations all would agree on what shot would be considered an unforced error, I've noticed that in some circumstances a particular shot may be viewed by some as an error while others may disagree. Something as minor as a statistician's point of view may lead them to mark the shot one way versus another. While there is generally a consensus of what the correct result of any one shot should be, the fact that two different people can generate two different Accu-Stats ratings for the same match seems to be less than proficient for our goal - therefore we decided to not use an "unforced error" when generating our Pool-Trax Performance Rating.
Also of notable difference, we have placed more of an emphasis on the break; in our rating system it does not hold the value of a single (regular) shot. The penalty for fouls (especially on the break) is also heavier weighted.

Thanks for the explanation.

The Accu-Stats formula is TPA = (Balls Pocketed) ÷ (Balls Pocketed + Errors).
Errors are of five types: miss errors (misses on shots easier than a spot shot are counted double), break errors, kick errors, safety errors, and position errors. Definitions and a sample calculation can be found here: http://www.accu-stats.com/AS-inst.pdf

Is your formula online somewhere? I'd like to understand it fully. It's not clear to me what you are saying about "unforced errors," as that isn't a term in the TPA formula. But I agree with you that it might be possible for two people to differ, for example, on whether a shot is easier than a spot shot, thereby creating different TPAs for the same match.

With all this being said I urge our guests to look beyond just the performance rating when checking the stats. While I've found this to be a great, quick look at players' performances, a true analysis is best done with the statistics provided in addition to the Pool-Trax Performance Rating.

I certainly agree with that!

 

[Pool-Trax]

Thanks for the explanation.

The Accu-Stats formula is TPA = (Balls Pocketed) ÷ (Balls Pocketed + Errors).
Errors are of five types: miss errors (misses on shots easier than a spot shot are counted double), break errors, kick errors, safety errors, and position errors. Definitions and a sample calculation can be found here: http://www.accu-stats.com/AS-inst.pdf

Is your formula online somewhere? I'd like to understand it fully. It's not clear to me what you are saying about "unforced errors," as that isn't a term in the TPA formula. But I agree with you that it might be possible for two people to differ, for example, on whether a shot is easier than a spot shot, thereby creating different TPAs for the same match.



I certainly agree with that!

Thanks for the correction - Error is what I was referring to. The formula will be posted a little later this year when our mobile app is released.

In full disclosure, the Pool-Trax Performance Rating system has also changed over the past couple of years since I created it. Having a rating system was not initially intended for my original direction but suggested by a few players - and due to the fact that I decided early to not track a statistic for errors I couldn't use the TPA rating system.
Also, because of some of its changes early on I also didn't want to post the formula until I had reached the final version with consistent results.

When I do post the formula I'll definitely post it in these forums too, so I'll be hoping to hear feedback on it; suggestions for improvements will always be welcome and appreciated.