The Arizona Rating System

CocoboloCowboy said:
Sand bagging is a problem in any system of handicap format, but sooner or later the truth rises to the surface, and the sand bagger is found out.
Click to expand...

Another problem is finding an honest person to set the handicaps. There are room owners who will give their regulars a break in their handicap.
 
Why shut out players from a tourney? That doesn't make sense. If players are scared of higher rated players,handicap the higher ranked players. Add 1 or 2 games for each level between the players. So you don't want the money out of the pockets of higher ranked players? As a room owner, i would want as many players in my house as possible. Why do i care? I lived and played in tucson a few years back, and saw it up close. Now i'm in some "little town" called lincoln,ne. We don't know much cowboy, but we understand pool real good. Might be why lincoln is hosting the grudge match between johnny and earl, and not phoenix. We have 2 -3 tourneys most weeks, at least one open handicapped tourney and a b and down for those who don't want the challenge.
 
Update

Here are my takes after a week of threading on the Arizona Rating System:

1. I want to change my original post claiming pool was dead or dying in Phoenix.

Several posters pointed out there are lots of tournaments and lots of opportunity compared to other regions of the US. I agree. If you are a 6 or 7 this is a great place to play.

2. I want to change my original post to say "competitive pool is dead" in Phoenix.

Like I said if you are a 6 or 7 this is a sweet deal. Especially with a rating committee focused on protecting your turf by getting the better players out of the system. By "competitive" I mean open to all players.

3. I conclude that numbers and letters are much more interesting to debate than how do we invigorate competitive pool in Arizona.

Whether we have 4 letters or 3 letters or 10 numbers or a formula ... was not my point. I was trying to argue that 6's and 7's knocking heads in small time bar table tournaments was not necessarily the paradigm for great pool. But, hey, who am I to impose a different vision? Maybe a better goal would be to become a 7! That's what most of my opponents rate me anyway.
 
oneballeddie said:
Here are my takes after a week of threading on the Arizona Rating System:

1. I want to change my original post claiming pool was dead or dying in Phoenix.

Several posters pointed out there are lots of tournaments and lots of opportunity compared to other regions of the US. I agree. If you are a 6 or 7 this is a great place to play.

2. I want to change my original post to say "competitive pool is dead" in Phoenix.

Like I said if you are a 6 or 7 this is a sweet deal. Especially with a rating committee focused on protecting your turf by getting the better players out of the system. By "competitive" I mean open to all players.

3. I conclude that numbers and letters are much more interesting to debate than how do we invigorate competitive pool in Arizona.

Whether we have 4 letters or 3 letters or 10 numbers or a formula ... was not my point. I was trying to argue that 6's and 7's knocking heads in small time bar table tournaments was not necessarily the paradigm for great pool. But, hey, who am I to impose a different vision? Maybe a better goal would be to become a 7! That's what most of my opponents rate me anyway.
Click to expand...

This post EARNS GREEN.
 
oneballeddie said:
Here are my takes after a week of threading on the Arizona Rating System:

1. I want to change my original post claiming pool was dead or dying in Phoenix.

Several posters pointed out there are lots of tournaments and lots of opportunity compared to other regions of the US. I agree. If you are a 6 or 7 this is a great place to play.

2. I want to change my original post to say "competitive pool is dead" in Phoenix.

Like I said if you are a 6 or 7 this is a sweet deal. Especially with a rating committee focused on protecting your turf by getting the better players out of the system. By "competitive" I mean open to all players.

3. I conclude that numbers and letters are much more interesting to debate than how do we invigorate competitive pool in Arizona.

Whether we have 4 letters or 3 letters or 10 numbers or a formula ... was not my point. I was trying to argue that 6's and 7's knocking heads in small time bar table tournaments was not necessarily the paradigm for great pool. But, hey, who am I to impose a different vision? Maybe a better goal would be to become a 7! That's what most of my opponents rate me anyway.
Click to expand...

I know your not a 7, your one of the best 8s in the state. I know you said you accept my challenge for King of the 8's. Let me know if your free this weekend or next weekend to play at Kolbys. I propose we play 8 ball, 9 ball and 1 pocket, I might be the King (5-0) but I am most likely an under dog in this match. Will be fun either way, win or lose. ;)
 
mlalum said:
no truer words were ever spoken.
Click to expand...

Are you guys serious? First time I met him we gambled and I beat him pretty bad. Same thing next time we played. Then we decided to play scotch and while I do agree he had some flashes of a 6 his overall play was a good 5. I have played with and against him for long periods of time and if you guys get him raised it will be unjust. Sorry for the hijack but I feel my friend is being unfairly judged.
 
oneballeddie said:
OK, I'll start a new thread on this. The goal is to see if it is possible to reach consensus on what if anything should be done to improve pool in Arizona. I for one think pool is moribund if not already dead in Phoenix and the reason is not the Arizona Rating System but the way the bar owners and tournament directors implement it. Two assertions:

1. The ratings (the numbers) are actually pretty good.

When I think about it I really cannot think of any player who is grossly overrated or underrated. By and large the numbers assigned to the 10,000 or so rated players seem pretty accurate. Sure there are abuses where a player on the cusp may be able to keep his lower rating through cronyism or other devices, or a member of the committee may have a grudge or financial motive to raise someone unfairly. But all in all the numbers seem ok, and there are mechanisms for adjusting or correcting errors.

So I conclude the problem is not the ratings or having handicapped tournaments. I'm sure there are improvements that could be made in how the numbers are set but that is an issue the Arizona Rating Committee can address. (For example, the principal agenda seems to be to raise people without a compensating mechanism to lower others which over time could result in knee jerk "lower everybody" reactions.) But, again in my opinion, the numbers are not at the heart of what's wrong with pool in Arizona.

2. The Arizona Rating System has a fatal flaw.

The flaw (in my opinion) is not the ratings but the way the bar owners and tournament directors misuse them. They use the ratings to keep good players out of their tournaments. So the good players have nowhere to play (except against each other in an occasional monthly tournament) and the weaker players have no competition to improve against. All the good players in town spend their pool time practicing alone or casually with a friend, and all the weaker players have their weekly 12 player $35 added to look forward to. Yes, there have been over 10,000 players rated by the Arizona Rating Committee but I venture that only about 300 or so are actively playing tournament pool around the Phoenix area. I think this is a direct result of a system that promotes players up and out. What successful sport (or business) is based on excluding its best players (or customers)?

I've heard the bar owners' argument that letting the good players in will kill their tournaments. "The 6's and 7's won't play and there's a lot more 6's than 10's that drink our beer!" Four points come to mind regarding this assumption: 1) you cannot kill something that is already seriously dead 2) the number of new players that come out of hibernation may indeed exceed the number of 6's who would rather drink beer than compete 3) maybe the 6's will come and drink beer anyway just to watch these good players and 4) you can still handicap your tournaments using the ratings if you want to create more parity. And while we're on the bar owners here's another thought. Maybe they could form a Arizona Pool and Bar Owners Association whose goal is to promote pool by coordinating tournament schedules, forming a travelling tour, and opening up tournaments to all players.

Does anyone remember the last big tournament at Pappy's in (I think) 2004 or 2005? Over 100 players. All players invited. Nice crowd with girlfriends and wives and entourages all enjoying the weekend activities. I recall Alan telling me it was the biggest business weekend they had since he owned the place.

These are just my opinions. Let's hear what you think.
Click to expand...

Youve got some good points, but I will say this from my experience.

I run two weekly tournaments out in Glendale. We started off getting between 8 and 11 players, and just last night we finally hit 24.

Its an 8 and under tournament NOW. We had a 10 walk in each week for a few months, play like he was desperate to win money (safeties galore against 5's and 6's) and won pretty much every week.

We started to lose players, and they complained about this guy. So last week, we told him its an 8 and under tournament and he is no longer invited.

As I mentioned... last night, for the first time, 24 players entered.

There is a WIDE margin between 6-8 and those above them. 9's and 10' will pretty much kill a weekly bar tournament because they can and do run out nearly every game without giving the other player a chance. Now, anything can happen on a bar table, but rarely are those mistakes made.

Second... 9's and 10's do not drink. Period. That has been my observation, as they come to win and make money, not to have fun and take winning and losing in stride.

My tournament keeps bringing in the regulars who are 5's and 6's because it is FUN, and those who are 7 and 8's drink right along with them and many times, those 5's and 6's beat the higher players in a single game, double elimination tournament.

For example. The guy (an 8) who won the Thursday 9-ball tournament this week was knocked out halfway through the 8-ball tourney last night.

The mantra of... lower players get better playing higher rated players is both true and false. These days, like any sport, there HAS to be an entertainment value for everyone... even if its just comradarie. Lower players in a weekly bar tournament want to at least FEEL they have a chance, even if they dont win often. If they can get decently far in a tournament for $5.00... then that is enough.

9's and 10's have a much different mindset than 5-8's. Those players have dedicated a TON more time in practice and playing, and it has become almost WORK... ie, you go there to win and anything less is a major failure.

There are enough 9's and 10's in town, and I agree with one point... there should be a place that caters more to them in tournaments.

Problem is one of your last points... 9's and 10's dont drink and eat much, and what bar would cater to them?

Argonath
 
stuckart said:
...This committee would have to be made up of NON ROOM OWNERS...
Click to expand...

Don't know how I missed this thread before... but, better late than never.

Jerry, you and I almost never agree when it comes to the Arizona ratings committee, but for once, I couldn't agree with you more.

I have so much to say on this topic... but a lot of it has already been said so many times before (both on this forum and in person over the last 10 years or so), and some of it hasn't. So, if Ed S. wants to take away something from this post, it's that I think the ratings committee should be made up of players and not pool room owners as Jerry suggested. Pool room owners have a business to run and will almost always put their business first (as they should). However, this does not make them ideal candidates for committee members for reasons already stated.

Ideally, the committee would be made up of a handful of TD's, and the rest would be players. And not just any players, but mid-level and higher rated players... ones who understand and can see the difference between a 10 and 10-1 as well as a 6 and a 7. Then there would also be the traditional player reps, like Bill Moore was... that have no real vested interest other than the love of the game. This is my .03 cents and take it for what it's worth <not much really>.

I've never been a proponent of the Arizona ratings committee, BUT if I were to ever get to a point where I said "I agree, a committee is necessary", it seems the above would make things a little less controversial and more fair in terms of ratings. The room owners would then have no choice but to create the best tournaments to bring in business, players and non-players alike.

FWIW, some of the biggest and best tournaments I remembering playing in back in the 90's (back when I was like a 6 or 7) were not 6 & Unders or 7 & Unders, but were huge open tournaments that were like a who's who of player entries. It was fun and exciting because you got to see so many of the great regional players playing along side every day 6's and 7's. Back in the hey-day of Roger Griffis, Andy Scott, Jimmy Mendoza, Dave Hemmah, Dan Wallace and other top players. And I was playing in these tournaments even though I was a lower rated player. I didn't care, I wanted to play the big names... I wanted the chance to beat someone better. What happened to these days? What happened to stepping up and putting everything out there on the line and paying your dues? Was I in the minority?

Ray
 
Last edited:
Fast Lenny said:
I know your not a 7, your one of the best 8s in the state. I know you said you accept my challenge for King of the 8's. Let me know if your free this weekend or next weekend to play at Kolbys. I propose we play 8 ball, 9 ball and 1 pocket, I might be the King (5-0) but I am most likely an under dog in this match. Will be fun either way, win or lose. ;)
Click to expand...

Well let's see. There was a big 8 and under tournament at Metros a couple weeks ago. The big winners were, wait for it, the 8's including one Eddie as i remember. All the cries about the handicap systems by the good players and players that don't play and still mostly the better players win. What's that mean? You might not like the handicap system but it still benefits the better player. So what's your argument exactly.
 
BigCat said:
Don't know how I missed this thread before... but, better late than never.

Jerry, you and I almost never agree when it comes to the Arizona ratings committee, but for once, I couldn't agree with you more.

I have so much to say on this topic... but a lot of it has already been said so many times before (both on this forum and in person over the last 10 years or so), and some of it hasn't. So, if Ed S. wants to take away something from this post, it's that I think the ratings committee should be made up of players and not pool room owners as Jerry suggested. Pool room owners have a business to run and will almost always put their business first (as they should). However, this does not make them ideal candidates for committee members for reasons already stated.

Ideally, the committee would be made up of a handful of TD's, and the rest would be players. And not just any players, but mid-level and higher rated players... ones who understand and can see the difference between a 10 and 10-1 as well as a 6 and a 7. Then there would also be the traditional player reps, like Bill Moore was... that have no real vested interest other than the love of the game. This is my .03 cents and take it for what it's worth <not much really>.

I've never been a proponent of the Arizona ratings committee, BUT if I were to ever get to a point where I said "I agree, a committee is necessary", it seems the above would make things a little less controversial and more fair in terms of ratings. The room owners would then have no choice but to create the best tournaments to bring in business, players and non-players alike.

FWIW, some of the biggest and best tournaments I remembering playing in back in the 90's (back when I was like a 6 or 7) were not 6 & Unders or 7 & Unders, but were huge open tournaments that were like a who's who of player entries. It was fun and exciting because you got to see so many of the great regional players playing along side every day 6's and 7's. Back in the hey-day of Roger Griffis, Andy Scott, Jimmy Mendoza, Dave Hemmah, Dan Wallace and other top players. And I was playing in these tournaments even though I was a lower rated player. I didn't care, I wanted to play the big names... I wanted the chance to beat someone better. What happened to these days? What happened to stepping up and putting everything out there on the line and paying your dues? Was I in the minority?

Ray
Click to expand...


Ray I understand the purist argument. But you all need to face the facts. The DCT was playing exactly how you suggest. They weren't getting many players to play. They added handicap. Got more players. Made the sponsors happy. And guess what the best players still win. If you want to kill tournaments that's fine. If you want to kill the venues that support em that's not so fine and defeating your entire purpose. Some of the people in this thread who are saying play open tournaments never play the open tournaments when they were here most recently. So again i'm not understanding the value of your arguments.
 
mlalum said:
Well let's see. There was a big 8 and under tournament at Metros a couple weeks ago. The big winners were, wait for it, the 8's including one Eddie as i remember. All the cries about the handicap systems by the good players and players that don't play and still mostly the better players win. What's that mean? You might not like the handicap system but it still benefits the better player. So what's your argument exactly.
Click to expand...
Where is my argument in the quote above? :confused:
 
mlalum said:
sorry lenny i'm still asleep. too early. what do you want to argue about?
Click to expand...

Haha, I am too passive of a person as of late and as some tough guy overseas would call a pu$$y. No arguing for me but an intelligent discussion without immature name calling I am all for. :thumbup:
 
BigCat said:
Don't know how I missed this thread before... but, better late than never.

Jerry, you and I almost never agree when it comes to the Arizona ratings committee, but for once, I couldn't agree with you more.

I have so much to say on this topic... but a lot of it has already been said so many times before (both on this forum and in person over the last 10 years or so), and some of it hasn't. So, if Ed S. wants to take away something from this post, it's that I think the ratings committee should be made up of players and not pool room owners as Jerry suggested. Pool room owners have a business to run and will almost always put their business first (as they should). However, this does not make them ideal candidates for committee members for reasons already stated.

Ideally, the committee would be made up of a handful of TD's, and the rest would be players. And not just any players, but mid-level and higher rated players... ones who understand and can see the difference between a 10 and 10-1 as well as a 6 and a 7. Then there would also be the traditional player reps, like Bill Moore was... that have no real vested interest other than the love of the game. This is my .03 cents and take it for what it's worth <not much really>.

I've never been a proponent of the Arizona ratings committee, BUT if I were to ever get to a point where I said "I agree, a committee is necessary", it seems the above would make things a little less controversial and more fair in terms of ratings. The room owners would then have no choice but to create the best tournaments to bring in business, players and non-players alike.

FWIW, some of the biggest and best tournaments I remembering playing in back in the 90's (back when I was like a 6 or 7) were not 6 & Unders or 7 & Unders, but were huge open tournaments that were like a who's who of player entries. It was fun and exciting because you got to see so many of the great regional players playing along side every day 6's and 7's. Back in the hey-day of Roger Griffis, Andy Scott, Jimmy Mendoza, Dave Hemmah, Dan Wallace and other top players. And I was playing in these tournaments even though I was a lower rated player. I didn't care, I wanted to play the big names... I wanted the chance to beat someone better. What happened to these days? What happened to stepping up and putting everything out there on the line and paying your dues? Was I in the minority?

Ray
Click to expand...

Ray,

While I agree with you for the most part (especially the next-to-last sentence in your post), I think it would be very difficult to exclude bar and pool room owners from having a huge influence on ratings when it is their rooms, their equipment, and their added monies that make the tournaments possible. I'm sure that if an organization went to a room owner and said they would bring in their own players, pay their own added money, and pay table rental; that owner wouldn't care one bit how they ran their tournament or rated the players.

And to the OP; as long as the DCT and AWBT are around, competitive pool is not totally dead in AZ (but it seems to be getting closer to it all the time).

All the while, there does exist a major concern here in AZ that tournament play is not what it used to be - both open, and handicapped. Most people think this is due to something being wrong with the rating system. In my opinion, it's not so much the rating system or the tournament formats, it's just that most of the play has gone to leagues. League play has always been big in AZ, but in the past 15 years or so, it has grown by leaps and bounds. Every day of the week, there are in-house and traveling leagues operating all over the Phoenix area. Not only that, most of them hold regular tournaments just for their players. This all creates tough competition for the independent tournaments.

I understand your complaint OP; I just don't think there is much that can be done about it.

Roger
 
mlalum said:
Ray I understand the purist argument. But you all need to face the facts. The DCT was playing exactly how you suggest. They weren't getting many players to play. They added handicap. Got more players. Made the sponsors happy. And guess what the best players still win. If you want to kill tournaments that's fine. If you want to kill the venues that support em that's not so fine and defeating your entire purpose. Some of the people in this thread who are saying play open tournaments never play the open tournaments when they were here most recently. So again i'm not understanding the value of your arguments.
Click to expand...

I hate to have to disagree with you, mlalum, but the DCT didn't get more players, they got fewer. I'm not saying that handicaps are the cause of that (it could have a lot to do with the economy); but the numbers are significantly lower than they were two or three years ago. :sorry:

Roger
 
Roger Long said:
I hate to have to disagree with you, mlalum, but the DCT didn't get more players, they got fewer. I'm not saying that handicaps are the cause of that (it could have a lot to do with the economy); but the numbers are significantly lower than they were two or three years ago. :sorry:

Roger
Click to expand...

Hate to disagree with you Roger. I'm talking more recent history. They changed it specifically because they were getting fewer players. And for awhile at least - parts of last season - they got a few more. But for the official count Dennis or Jude would be best to answer.

btw Roger thanks for the donation to the Susan Williams travel fund.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top