The interesting thing about Karen Corr...

Sloppy Pockets said:
After Shaw told Geoff Conway that he would "drill her" in their match because "she can't break", Karen got to the hill first in spite of that flaw in her game. I'd love to see the match myself. All reports are that she is playing at a very high level right now, maybe the best in her entire career.

Shaw had this to say to Daz on FB:

"Was under pressure big time stayed calm and positive and at the end took my chances and come with some great shots she played unbelievable she play just as good as any body in that room pal"

Just as good as any male at the tourney, in the words of the top male player who barely got past her. One thing I'm pretty sure of - she ain't scared of any of them.
Click to expand...

Exaggeration.



Lets keep it real here. People can say that she gets no respect because she is a woman. But imo she gets more respect because she is a woman.

Lets say that she is equivalent to a man that plays around Joey Grey's speed. She's not but lets say she is because he has a fargo rating that is about the same as Karen. Now lets imagine how everyone would be reacting if Joey beat Ko. Which he certainly could do if he is on. People are going to say great match etc. No one is going to go on about how he is as good as anyone in the room ... or as Superstar said, say he is due to win the open. He played a great match.

There is no way that Jason actually believes that Karen is as good as anyone in that room. But it doesn't really matter. Whatever happened, break advantage with the set up, or whatever she still must have played good no doubt. I will give her that.
 
mikepage said:
Yes, that's right. And if Karen was the ONLY link between men and women, then every woman on the planet would go up by the exact same amount Karen goes up.

But she is not the only link; there are many thousands of matches that couple men to women.
Click to expand...

So, how much has Ga Young Kim's Fargo rating go up during this US Open?
 
Celtic said:
So, how much has Ga Young Kim's Fargo rating go up during this US Open?
Click to expand...

This is an interesting question. Before answering, let me put it in context.

You can look at Fargo Ratings as a living, breathing system that goes something like this. You gain credit for winning any game gaining more credit for winning a game against a high-rated opponent. You lose credit for losing any game losing more credit for losing a game against a low-rated opponent. And when the optimization is done it looks at all games present and past (weighting recent games more).

So suppose the Europeans as a group do well in the US open and their ratings go up. That means a European like Joshua Filler from Germany--who has basically only played on the Eurotour--will suddenly get a wee bit more credit for his past wins and be a wee bit more forgiven for his past losses. So he will see a small increase. In fact Joshua went up 0.7 points during the US Open.

By the same logic, if Karen goes up, all the people who had game wins against Karen in the past will get a little more credit for them, and those with game losses against Karen will be slightly more forgiven. But those people are also coupled to Pin Yi Ko, and the opposite effect is in place as well.

In this case, Ga Young Kim and Siming Chen both went up 1.1 points. Jasmin Ouschan went up 0.7 points. For comparison, Jiaqing Wu (world top rated player) went up 0.7. Efren went down 0.3. Busty went up 0.1.

We all in a sense have diversified stock in all the people we've played. Our game outcomes against those people tell us where we are relative to them. And if they have a tendency to rise or fall as a group, we rise and fall with them.
 
mikepage said:
This is an interesting question. Before answering, let me put it in context.

You can look at Fargo Ratings as a living, breathing system that goes something like this. You gain credit for winning any game gaining more credit for winning a game against a high-rated opponent. You lose credit for losing any game losing more credit for losing a game against a low-rated opponent. And when the optimization is done it looks at all games present and past (weighting recent games more).

So suppose the Europeans as a group do well in the US open and their ratings go up. That means a European like Joshua Filler from Germany--who has basically only played on the Eurotour--will suddenly get a wee bit more credit for his past wins and be a wee bit more forgiven for his past losses. So he will see a small increase. In fact Joshua went up 0.7 points during the US Open.

By the same logic, if Karen goes up, all the people who had game wins against Karen in the past will get a little more credit for them, and those with game losses against Karen will be slightly more forgiven. But those people are also coupled to Pin Yi Ko, and the opposite effect is in place as well.

In this case, Ga Young Kim and Siming Chen both went up 1.1 points. Jasmin Ouschan went up 0.7 points. For comparison, Jiaqing Wu (world top rated player) went up 0.7. Efren went down 0.3. Busty went up 0.1.

We all in a sense have diversified stock in all the people we've played. Our game outcomes against those people tell us where we are relative to them. And if they have a tendency to rise or fall as a group, we rise and fall with them.
Click to expand...

Now I fully understand it. Seems like a high end version of the way we try to match up in the pool room. Well You beat Jack and Jack beats me so you should should spot me.

Seems like an interesting way to rate people and I am sure you have quite a bit of data to accumulate.
 
pressure?

kagewest said:
No one has even stated the obvious. If jayson shaw played a male that had Karens exact skill level the match would have not been so close. It's added pressure and it's tough to bring your A game. That's a pure and simple fact. Karen has zero to loose the least amount of pressure on her in the whole event. Practically a free roll. Now the males that have to play her not so much.
Click to expand...

Yeah, there's tremendous pressure on men when they play women. After all, male egos tend to bruise very easily.
 
kagewest said:
No one has even stated the obvious. If jayson shaw played a male that had Karens exact skill level the match would have not been so close. It's added pressure and it's tough to bring your A game. That's a pure and simple fact. Karen has zero to loose the least amount of pressure on her in the whole event. Practically a free roll. Now the males that have to play her not so much.
Click to expand...

Yeah, no pressure, drawing your first round with one of the best 9ballers in the world :rolleyes: And the waiting to play another Monster right around the corner. Brilliant, just brilliant.

Yeah, did Jason have pressure, yeah, he knew he was playing someone who just blindsided one of the best players in the world, who wouldn't. No more, no less.

Of Course, Karen had to follow up with another great performance so the "pool nobodies" don't start accusing her of just being a fluke. Get real.
 
kagewest said:
No one has even stated the obvious. If jayson shaw played a male that had Karens exact skill level the match would have not been so close. It's added pressure and it's tough to bring your A game. That's a pure and simple fact. Karen has zero to loose the least amount of pressure on her in the whole event. Practically a free roll. Now the males that have to play her not so much.
Click to expand...

You obviously don't understand the mindset of a true champion. True champions like Shaw and Ko are not insecure. It's insecurity that makes men uncomfortable playing women because they are worried about not being masculine enough if they lose or being teased by their peers if they lose.

When you have proven yourself over and over as one of the best players in the world, those thoughts don't even cross your mind. People like you who worry about playing a woman usually fold like a cheap suit when faced with any kind of pressure --- regardless of gender.

The only pressure on these two champions was that they both knew they were playing against an exceptional player.
 
Last edited:
FranCrimi said:
You obviously don't understand the mindset of a true champion. True champions like Shaw and Ko are not insecure. It's insecurity that makes men uncomfortable playing women because they are worried about not being masculine enough if they lose or being teased by their peers if they lose.

When you have proven yourself over and over as one of the best players in the world, those thoughts don't even cross your mind. People like you who worry about playing a woman usually fold like a cheap suit when faced with any kind of pressure --- regardless of gender.

The only pressure on these two champions was that they both knew they were playing against an exceptional player.
Click to expand...

She, like Allison Fisher is a thoroughbred when it comes to her as a person and player. From my perch, Karen's been playing with the ''boyz'' in the NE for quite some time now. Eva cut her teeth with Jimmy, Lori Jon with Sammy, Karen's choice is....learn from em all. She chose the pool room to gain knowlege, like she did when she chose snooker, tho I'm beginning to think, Snooker chose her :D. like 2 1/4'' balls did Efren.
 
BmoreMoney said:
There is a VERY simple way to put an end to any and all speculation in regards to all the Man vs women issues. Completely stop women's only events and all events be truly " open ".
Click to expand...

That's not a good idea.

The fundamental reason for having separate sporting events for young people, old people, and women (and other classifications in some sports) is that people in these classifications typically perform at an inferior level compared to adult males who are not yet seniors. If the young, the old, and females did not have their own events, these people would be unable to win much of anything in the sports world. They are in "protected" classes so they can compete with similar people.

But at the highest level in most sports, the events are, and should be, open to any human being capable of competing at that level.

In the amateur golf world, for example, the U.S. Golf Association sponsors these six events (and some others) -- one for junior females, one for juniors as a whole, one for senior women, one for seniors as a whole, one for women of any age, and one for human beings of any age or sex. This last event is the U.S. Amateur, open to anyone who qualifies. And if a senior woman was good enough, she could play in both of the senior events and both of the adult (but-not-yet-senior) events. In fact, if this same senior woman was good enough to qualify, she could also play in the U.S. Open (amateurs and pros).

In pool, we see the same sort of thing -- events for juniors, or women, or "Class B" players, or wheelchair players, etc. These groups need to be protected in this way, because most of their players would be completely uncompetitive in open events. But if people in these classes are good enough, they can also try to compete at the highest level in truly open events, which, of course, are currently dominated by adult males.

Perhaps someday women pool players won't need their own tour. But in the meantime, it's a real pleasure to see a few of them able to compete with the top men. And to argue that the top men should therefore be eligible to compete in women's events is just ludicrous.

(This repeats comments I made on this same subject a few years ago.)
 
AtLarge said:
That's not a good idea.

The fundamental reason for having separate sporting events for young people, old people, and women (and other classifications in some sports) is that people in these classifications typically perform at an inferior level compared to adult males who are not yet seniors. If the young, the old, and females did not have their own events, these people would be unable to win much of anything in the sports world. They are in "protected" classes so they can compete with similar people.

But at the highest level in most sports, the events are, and should be, open to any human being capable of competing at that level.

In the amateur golf world, for example, the U.S. Golf Association sponsors these six events (and some others) -- one for junior females, one for juniors as a whole, one for senior women, one for seniors as a whole, one for women of any age, and one for human beings of any age or sex. This last event is the U.S. Amateur, open to anyone who qualifies. And if a senior woman was good enough, she could play in both of the senior events and both of the adult (but-not-yet-senior) events. In fact, if this same senior woman was good enough to qualify, she could also play in the U.S. Open (amateurs and pros).

In pool, we see the same sort of thing -- events for juniors, or women, or "Class B" players, or wheelchair players, etc. These groups need to be protected in this way, because most of their players would be completely uncompetitive in open events. But if people in these classes are good enough, they can also try to compete at the highest level in truly open events, which, of course, are currently dominated by adult males.

Perhaps someday women pool players won't need their own tour. But in the meantime, it's a real pleasure to see a few of them able to compete with the top men. And to argue that the top men should therefore be eligible to compete in women's events is just ludicrous.

(This repeats comments I made on this same subject a few years ago.)
Click to expand...

Exactly. That was the tongue in cheek point I was making. Most don't want to say it but in general majority of women can not compete with the men. Are there a handful of women that can? Yes. Can all of them beat me? Yes of course☺ But speaking in general no. I proposed what I did because that would show that without dispute and was just waiting for someone to comment on it but crickets as I kinda expected.
 
Did anyone notice her 14.1 match on Saturday against Johnny Archer?
She won 100 - 8 :)

Last year, she placed 2nd in the same 14.1 tourney with Daren Appleton placing 1st.
 
BmoreMoney said:
Exactly. That was the tongue in cheek point I was making. Most don't want to say it but in general majority of women can not compete with the men. Are there a handful of women that can? Yes. Can all of them beat me? Yes of course☺ But speaking in general no. I proposed what I did because that would show that without dispute and was just waiting for someone to comment on it but crickets as I kinda expected.
Click to expand...

I wasn't sure you were teasing, and what you said has been proposed seriously in the past, so I went ahead and repeated something I've said previously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top