The No Handicapping Crowd Cracks Me Up

[SUPERSTAR]

So for all you anti-handicappers out there – lighten up a bit. There’s nothing wrong with handicapping. It’s everywhere in sports and it serves a very valuable purpose in our world. Without it, I’m afraid this game of ours would have died long ago.

There is nothing wrong with handicapping.
Handicap tournaments or leagues are fine for those who enjoy them.
But people who enter scratch events and then get mad that they can't ever win, who then want to change the tournament format to handicap to allow them to win or cash?
Those sissies should just quit pool.
They are losers.

They should stay home or go play in some handicapped event.

 

[GaryB]

Sometimes it is as much fun watching the drama involved in two upper echelon players woofing and barking to set up their spot in a money match than it is watching the game.
Keith was a pure pleasure.

 

[deanoc]

Keith was?

call Jam,I think Keieth is still up to the same ole thing

he is a master to watch along with Billy Incardone

 

[BasementDweller]

Poolplaya9,
Nice post. Ive always preferred the 80% handicap. Like you, I don't like the idea of turning every tourney or league matchup into a coin flip proposition. I don't think the less than 100% handicaps are all that uncommon but for some reason we never talk about them.

Anyway, I've moved you near the top my list of favorite posters. Your posts are always so well thought out. Thanks for putting in the effort for us all.

 

[Poolplaya9]

I can give you at least a part of the answer why handicapped events cater to the lower skilled players - money. This is a fact, no its not a blanket statement but is it for sure true more often than not. The lower skilled players are the bread and butter for most establishments.

You are exactly right. I don't know of a pool hall anywhere that could survive solely off of the real "players" and anybody that has been around much knows that as a whole they tend to be decidedly cheap (obviously there are plenty of exceptions to that but I am talking overall, on average). Most of the money comes from the lesser skilled players so of course the pool halls will want to cater to them to some extent and keep them happy since they are truly what mostly keeps the doors open. Good point.

 

[SJDinPHX]

Sometimes it is as much fun watching the drama involved in two upper echelon players woofing and barking to set up their spot in a money match than it is watching the game. Keith was a pure pleasure.<--Keith was not near as sharp in that area, as Bill Incardona was..Billy was (and still is) the all time master at matching up!

I do agree though..The challenge on the table is secondary..It is always preceded by the woofing, and making the best game you can possibly get!..All good players need to hone their skills in the 'matching up' department, as that is where almost all games (and $$$) are won or lost!

PS..We'd all be much better off, if we had learned how to match up, before we learned how to draw the ball.

 

[BmoreMoney]

I agree! The challenge on the table is secondary..It is always preceded by the making the best game you can possibly get!..All good players need to hone their skills in the 'matching up' department, as that is where almost all games (and $$$) are won or lost!

PS..We'd all be much better off, if we had learned how to match up, before we learned how to draw the ball.

I'm right there with you on this SJD. A huge part of " paying our dues " IS learning how to match up, more so than actual table time IMO.

 

[JC]

99% of every game i ever played involved a spot

all this blowhard big shot talk is just that
without a spot how can anybody play a better player
guys who don't like spots are afraid to gamble

colonel is right about this

Spots don't make anything equal. Someone always has the best of it.

But it does garner interest in actually playing. A worthy goal in and of itself.

JC

 

[FranCrimi]

If you need a handicap, take off your skirt, step up and pay your entry fee like a man.

I assume you mean to insult men who need handicaps by telling them to stop acting like women.

What you probably really meant was to stop acting like a cry-baby, which we know men are so much better at than women when it comes to antics in pool rooms.

Unfortunately, handicaps are a necessity, especially in local tournaments and leagues. There will always be someone who tries to get one over on everyone else, but they eventually will get caught and then banned, as well as humiliated.

 

[Patrick53212]

handicaps or spots

I don't want the crutch. What happens when you consistently play getting a spot is that you don't get past that spot. Mentally, that spot handicaps you as a player. In other words, you get used to only playing to the seven, the eight, or one of the last three or four balls as opposed to preparing mentally to get to and making the nine. Likewise, getting games on the wire does the same thing. I have played guys that I will crush if they have to play me without games on the wire but suddenly if they have two or three games on the wire they play with confidence to stay with me and even beat me. For instance, giving someone three games on the wire going to nine and they beat me 9-5. They actually were ahead by a game or better the entire set. They have the ability to break and run out just like I do, they can kick, jump, and play safe just as well also...the only part of their game lacking is the mental part and a spot is not going to improve that. I get the part about the need to cater to the players that spend more money in the bar or pool hall. I am just talking strictly from handicaps or spots and how they are a detriment to improving your game. The best way to get better is to play in Open Events, practice and get instruction or advice from instructors or better players, and to match up for cheap against better players without a spot ($20 to $50 sets races to 5, 7, 9 or more). Just my opinion of course...

 

[robsnotes4u]

There are two sides to this issue. Side one says I should be rewarded for my talent, hard work, skill, time investment, etc--not punished for it. Lazy players (or even those that just don't have the desire or talent) shouldn't be rewarded for their laziness. Life isn't fair and people aren't equal and that is just the way it is and pool is no different. The best will and should win. All good points and all true.

Side two says the reality is that many people just aren't going to flat out donate when they have little or no chance. And for those that will, they aren't going to do it week after week forever. They eventually get tired of it and will stop coming at some point. And so the reality is that when a select few individuals always dominate the competition and nobody else even has a chance the competition starts to dry up. People stop coming. Events die off. Better to have lots of events with a more even playing field than to have few or even no events. Something is better than nothing. Pool is in dire straights as it is and we should do what we need to do to get all the participation we can even if it isn't always the most "fair". All good points and all true.

Like with lots of things, especially when both sides have really strong points, a compromise is probably in order. That compromise would be for an area to have some open events, and some handicapped events, so those of both sides have something to go to.

And a great compromise that I never hear being used is that when you do have to have handicapped events, make them to where the better player still maintains a little advantage in each match. If a dead even race between two opponents in a handicapped tournament match would be one goes to 9 and the other goes to 6, then instead make it where the less skilled opponent has to get to 7 to get the win instead of 6. That way the more skilled players are still favored and will win the events more often, but the lesser skilled players still have a chance and will win often enough to keep them interested and coming back. They know they are not as skilled and shouldn't win as often and will be fine with that as long as they know they actually have a chance and can snap off an event on occasion when they really play above their head or get all the rolls.

I have no idea why more handicapped tournaments don't do this where a slight advantage is still always given to the more skilled player. Seems like it would still keep the "I should be rewarded for my superior skill" crowd coming even if the format isn't their first preference (because they still maintain an advantage even if it is not their full advantage), and would also keep the "no way in hell I am going to be a dead money donating week after week with no chance" crowd coming even if the format isn't their first preference either (because they still have a chance and will get to snap off a win on occasion even though it won't be as often as the better players will).

Mike Page has different charts using FargoRate. This an example of one

.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Skippy27]

Handicapping is all about enticing a lower skilled player to participate and to be willing to put up and take a chance. You can say they need to man up or get better, but that is not going to entice them to participate and ultimately that is what you want. If you are a superior player to your opponent and can't accept handicapping then you are just as big of a sissy as those that want it.

I have seen some tournaments that cater to lower players by requiring a lower entry fee and then paying out to the best placing person of that rating. It entices them to play because it is cheaper and they still have a chance to walk away with some money even if they don't win it all.

I have seen gambling that the person will give odds so that if he wins he gets $100, but the other person will get $200 if they win to an even race or mix that in with maybe a match win handicap as well.

It doesnt matter how you do it or what you do, the goal is to entice more people to play.

 

[philly]

Playing in a 32 man field non handicapped 8 ball tournament on 9 foot Gold Crowns tomorrow. I am a solid B player that can elevate my game higher at times. At least a quarter of the field are really solid A players and usually in these tournament there are a couple players that routinely match up with pros. I have no chance of winning this tournament however I have finished in the money before and that is my goal. I just love the competition and testing myself. Races are to 5 and I always think if I play my best game and get a couple of rolls in a short race, I can beat anybody.

 

[Matt]

The whole idea of a spot in pool is to get weaker players to think they have enough of a chance to beat a better player that they are willing to get into action. Whether it's an A player vs. a B player, a D- player against a D player, a tournament or gambling, a proper spot should still give the better player the upper hand.

As much complaining as I've heard about handicaps, there is a very limited practical demand for non-handicapped tournaments. Open tournaments attract 3 types of players: the real contenders, the long shots, and the players that are willing to donate for the experience or recognition from their peers. How often would you show up for a tournament and pay a significant amount of money (beyond whatever you consider the entertainment/social value) when you are practically guaranteed to be out in the first few rounds?

Some of the most fun I've had playing pool was when we managed to get a group of fairly evenly matched players (B/B+) together and run our own small $50 double-elimination tournament. Everyone was comfortable playing even with all of the other players even though there were some definite favorites to win the whole thing. This went on for a while until we invited a player that was clearly better than the entire group to join us, and then it all fell apart, almost overnight (I think we had 2 tournaments with him before it stopped). Having that one better player didn't really add anything to the experience, but it significantly detracted from everyone's perceived chance of winning to pot. The money itself wasn't enough to be an issue for anyone; it was the feeling that you were just giving it away that was the problem.

To those that say the players that are asking for handicaps just need to get better, you have to consider the fact that playing pool well and winning money by doing so just isn't a priority to everyone. I know very few, if any, players above the C level that haven't dedicated a large amount of their free time to pool in the past, and I don't know any A players that maintain that level of play without playing on a regular basis.

To the weaker players that need handicaps to compete, I would say that you shouldn't expect a handicap that gives you an even chance of winning (at least in a tournament; matching up is a different story). IMO, proper handicapping should still make the weaker player the underdog, and the inevitable result is that a very low ranked player is going to still be a severe underdog to a very high ranked player. The best players should always be the favorite to win a tournament.

 

[Matt]

I don't want the crutch. What happens when you consistently play getting a spot is that you don't get past that spot. Mentally, that spot handicaps you as a player. In other words, you get used to only playing to the seven, the eight, or one of the last three or four balls as opposed to preparing mentally to get to and making the nine. Likewise, getting games on the wire does the same thing. I have played guys that I will crush if they have to play me without games on the wire but suddenly if they have two or three games on the wire they play with confidence to stay with me and even beat me. For instance, giving someone three games on the wire going to nine and they beat me 9-5. They actually were ahead by a game or better the entire set. They have the ability to break and run out just like I do, they can kick, jump, and play safe just as well also...the only part of their game lacking is the mental part and a spot is not going to improve that. I get the part about the need to cater to the players that spend more money in the bar or pool hall. I am just talking strictly from handicaps or spots and how they are a detriment to improving your game. The best way to get better is to play in Open Events, practice and get instruction or advice from instructors or better players, and to match up for cheap against better players without a spot ($20 to $50 sets races to 5, 7, 9 or more). Just my opinion of course...

That's all fine as long as it's worth whatever you are paying those better players for the experience (to you), but there's a point for everyone where it's not. You mentioned playing $20 to $50 sets against a better player without a spot...why not $200 to $500 a set? Even if you can afford it, there's a point where it's obvious that you're being taken advantage of. For some people the threshold is much lower.

 

[Mrdodd72]

99% of every game i ever played involved a spot

all this blowhard big shot talk is just that
without a spot how can anybody play a better player
guys who don't like spots are afraid to gamble

colonel is right about this

Gambling and competitive play are 2 different creatures.

Gambling is a couple of players hashing out a good match, for cash. The cash is center stage in gambling.

The post was referring to tournament play, and the complaining that accompanies the handicapped format.

I personally was bemoaning the lack of a competitive nature from the "anyone should be able to win" crowd.

 

[Skippy27]

IMO, proper handicapping should still make the weaker player the underdog, and the inevitable result is that a very low ranked player is going to still be a severe underdog to a very high ranked player. The best players should always be the favorite to win a tournament.

People are going to accept a spot that they think they can overcome. If either player believes a spot gives the other person the advantage they wont take it. That goes for both the better and the weaker player, whether it is tournament play or gambling.

With pool there comes a point to where a weaker player has very little to no chance at winning against a very strong player no matter the spot. There are probably some here I couldn't beat if the race was 25 to 5 or even 100 to 5 and I don't suck. So do you think I will take any handicap from them for any amount of decent money? What if there was a tournament that was filled with enough of those much better players that they cover the money, do you think I am going to bother to enter? Hell no! I am smarter than that and I am perfectly able to check my ego at the door and know my abilities.

Those that say you can get better by playing these people are barely right. You don't learn much more sitting there watching them kick your ass than you do if you simply watch them for free while not participating. Sure you may get to kick at a couple balls because they safe you or you get to fight the added pressure of not missing if you do get to shoot, but those micro bits of experience are just that and it will take a looooooong time to be worth it. You would be much better served to be at a table playing and shooting, then sitting and watching you get your own ass kicked.

 

[Allen Brown]

I don't want the crutch. What happens when you consistently play getting a spot is that you don't get past that spot. Mentally, that spot handicaps you as a player. In other words, you get used to only playing to the seven, the eight, or one of the last three or four balls as opposed to preparing mentally to get to and making the nine. Likewise, getting games on the wire does the same thing. I have played guys that I will crush if they have to play me without games on the wire but suddenly if they have two or three games on the wire they play with confidence to stay with me and even beat me. For instance, giving someone three games on the wire going to nine and they beat me 9-5. They actually were ahead by a game or better the entire set. They have the ability to break and run out just like I do, they can kick, jump, and play safe just as well also...the only part of their game lacking is the mental part and a spot is not going to improve that. I get the part about the need to cater to the players that spend more money in the bar or pool hall. I am just talking strictly from handicaps or spots and how they are a detriment to improving your game. The best way to get better is to play in Open Events, practice and get instruction or advice from instructors or better players, and to match up for cheap against better players without a spot ($20 to $50 sets races to 5, 7, 9 or more). Just my opinion of course...

This is exactly why I don't like spots.

 

[couldnthinkof01]

Getting your ass kicked is good for the right person.

It forces you to improve quickly by paying attention to why the other person is winning and practicing hard for the next go round.

Its not all bad. Speeds up the learning process with competitive fire.

Two players of the same ability.
If player x spent 6 months playing a game with someone way, way better no spot 10 games/2 days a week
And player y plays handicapped leagues 10 games/2 days a week for the same period.
Who is your money on in an x vs. y race to 10?

 

[fastone371]

Getting your ass kicked is good for the right person.

It forces you to improve quickly by paying attention to why the other person is winning and practicing hard for the next go round.

Its not all bad. Speeds up the learning process with competitive fire.

Two players of the same ability.
If player x spent 6 months playing a game with someone way, way better no spot 10 games/2 days a week
And player y plays handicapped leagues 10 games/2 days a week for the same period.
Who is your money on in an x vs. y race to 10?

Do you really think the superior player is going to be giving his best game to the weak player? I dont think so. I wish this were not the case but when I play a much weaker opponent I do things that I would not do had I been playing a much better opponent than myself. I spend a lot of time at home practicing on my table, it seems that once you get to a certain level improvements come slowly, that you can go 6 months or longer without improving much.