The Biggest Flaw of APA's Handicapping
- Thread starter Woodshaft
- Start date
My guess the cap is to keep compatibility, so league operators can offer the more lucrative double jeopardy format (playing both 8-ball and 9-ball).
As I posted earlier, APA offers other league products such as Masters (no cap), and Super 30 (team cap of 30). In my short time playing in different APA territories, noticed offerings can vary. It's at the discretion of the local APA league operator which league products to offer. So, it's not uncommon to not hear of any of these if you never ventured past your local area.
Last edited:
Talk to your LO about Super 30. It's an APA league format where the limit is 30, not 23. There is no road to Las Vegas, so in places where it's offered, its only offered as a cash league.Yep I've had to split my team a couple of times over the last 5 years. It sucks when you have a good group, but it is also fun to see someone taking over as a new captain and building their team...and then crushing them on the table.
I can answer that one, but probably not to your satisfaction. Find the two best 9's you can and put them on a team together. They're going to AVERAGE 17-3 each week. The other three players on the team never have to win a match to put the team in the playoffs every session. It's not supposed to be easy like that.
Contrast that with 8-Ball, the two best 7's still only average a little over 2 points apiece each week. At some point your other players have to win.
For the rest of the skill levels, this does not hold true. They can't constantly clobber opponents every week without going up. So, since there's an 8 the limit should be 24, right? No, for every 8 there are a dozen 1's. That makes 23 equivalent in both formats.
Now, if I had my way teams would be limited to only one 7 in 8-Ball or 9 in 9-Ball. Then looking at a higher team limit in 9-Ball or both formats would be worthwhile. The player distribution by skill level probably still isn't there to justify it, but it would be worth a look.
dquarasr
Registered
Mostly makes sense. Thanks for answering.
I guess the skill level distribution will depend on your area.
Unless I've misunderstood your point "for every 8 there are a dozen 1's", my league has more 9's than 1's. Which makes it more difficult to play higher SLs regularly, but I assume this what the APA somewhat prefers.
I always like to hear your inciteful feedback, being on the other side of things, gives the perspective we don't normally hear.
Their handicap system has a formula built in for table difficulties. There is a a difference in scoring between a valley & diamond if the LO is doing their job correctly.
The local APA I played in last spring had a rule in place that went something like this...
No more then two senior players (6 and above) are allowed to play in any one match.
This was for 8 ball.
No more then two senior players (6 and above) are allowed to play in any one match.
This was for 8 ball.
They really don't want a 9 to play all that often in 9 ball. They are more like a coach/mentor than anything else. In league championships I would sacrifice my lowest player usually a 2 or a 1 if available against the 9. Sucks for them as that is not fun for either player but in that situation you are trying to win. 9 ball in apa ball race format is designed for lower ranked players as there is no real pressure to make the money ball other than to achieve a break and an opportunity to bonus a couple of balls.
This practice is what actually drove me out of CPA (APA). Except it continually happened throughout the session and not just playoffs. The last straw was when my captain fell for a 'bait and switch'. It was our turn to put up next. There was a supposed agreement that I'd play their strongest. However before the ink had dried on my name they switched in their 2. I don't blame them, its smart in terms of "trying to win".
I play pool to compete. Having teams protect their little sharks from the bigger shark, just didn't interest me.
Another flaw in the APA handicapping.... Not forcing match ups of similar SL
To clarify we never did this in the regular league as I always wanted to play better players as did my teammates. Talking about in the vegas qualifier tourney. I am not afraid to play anyone because in the end this is supposed to be fun. I no longer play in the APA (play BCA) by the way because of a lot of reasons.
Ghost of OBC
Well-known member
The problem isn't the handicapping, it is the eons it takes to get through matches. I was recently at a tri-cup played at a place with all Diamond 7s. Nearly every match ended up in sudden death. The 23 rule, plus sub 4.5 inch pockets makes for absolutely glacial events. It isn't like the average APA player is running out so often their opponent doesn't get to shoot.
Problem we had in using Handicapping System in Arizona was simple, people hiding speed, people fooling person giving initial rating, and good old sandbagging. They would come to town do some event, win, and run to next victim, or city.
TOURNMENT Hustlers.
TOURNMENT Hustlers.
My perspective on this - every LOs ideal world would be for every team to have 3 or 4 players at the highest skill level. If they want to keep playing, they’ll need to start another team with new players. Within limits, the league grows and the LO makes a lot of money. Now the real world; this will never happen. People will quit APA. I’ve seen this for over 20 years.
I agree with this, I don't think I played one full match in Tri cups or Cities that didn't end in sudden death. It's kind of lame to have those important tournaments end in a single sudden death match. All session long teams play on at least two table every week, but come tournaments we can only play on one table. One match that gets into a safety battle between two 6's can take and hour and half or more (I been there). I shot a 2 hour+ match once in tri cups and neither of us shot slow, we just played very conservatively because both of us were shooting really good and not missing much. Any iffy shots were not taken and played defense instead.
Last Cities tournament we started friday night and we didn't get out of there until after midnight, had to be back there at 8:00am the next morning, played until 1:30am and lost (in SD) in the quarter finals. If we would have won that match we would have had to be back in there at 8:00am on Sunday to play the semi finals and finals. That last match for me on Sat night into Sun morning was rough. I played another 6 and I honestly don't know how I made it through the match, I was just DONE... I even fell asleep in my chair at one point, I ended up winning that match, but I have no idea how, I don't even remember playing most of it. That was NOT fun, we aren't pro's who are used to playing 15+ hour days tournaments.
The only problem with that is that it leads nowhere. It's just like overuse of the all-in bluff in poker. Sure, it will win a lot of hands but your opponent only has to "have it" once to beat you. So, that lineup would be very strong on average and is pretty much guaranteed playoffs, but even one Super 9 can take out one one of yours so that team's no lock in a tournament. The constant playoff thing will turn off a lot of teams though.
But isn't the break part of the skill set? If you have two players of identical skill, with the exception that one is a weak breaker and one is strong, wouldn't you say one is better than the other? In fact, when I talk to highly-skilled players who just played a very close match or just lost, the #1 reason they give me is "my break wasn't working".
I think the fact that you can point out that difference and state that the weaker player might be "rewarded" with a lower SL number says a lot.