There will be blood

[Mickey Qualls]

... I've seen more than once a LO playing on a team that had questionable things happen for players on his/her team that were beneficial for their teams. It wouldn't matter by the time playoffs came around that the LO couldn't play in them because the damage would have ALREADY been done.

... I've been around a couple, one was just plain dishonest and the other did some things that were highly questionable, and they did things FOR their team. This disgusted me to the point of not playing in those leagues anymore. This is why I do not feel it appropriate to allow LO's to play within their own league system.

Shoot 'em well, my friend!!!

Maniac

Much respect, Maniac...

Define questionable.

There was a BCA league where I used to live, that the handicap formula was simple. Balls made divided by games played equaled your average.
(For those unfamiliar with BCA 8-Ball, each ball worth a point, the 8 is worth three points. So if a player had a 'ball count' of 354 over the course of 48 games, 354 divided by 48 equals 7.37. Which would translate to a 7.5 average).

Then one of the LO's got the 'bright idea' (after having been beaten by a first year team that was ranked appropriately, in my opinion) of factoring a certain percentage of your OPPONENT'S balls into the average formula.
(I felt they were ranked appropriately because both times WE played that team (double elimination playoffs), each match went to the final game. Basically, the LO's team didn't 'show up' table-wise, got slaughtered, and couldn't mentally accept the loss).

Now, the 'science' or 'dark art' of this new handicap system has never been explained correctly by any of the LO's. One tells me that the system takes your last 25 games history. Another tells me it's 'lifetime' (since the inception of the 'new' handicap system).
Coincidentally, since the implementation of the new system, save for one season. the LO's teams has consistently won the division. Hmm...

That's my definition of "questionable".

I mean, if there's a transparent handicap system in place, that's easy to understand, then I (personally) don't see a problem with an LO playing on a team.

So are talking about 'bad calls' kind of stuff ??

Mickey <--- Knows Mickey went on a rant, but is curious about Maniac's statement...

 

[lorider]

lorider,

I usually agree with much of your postings, but this is one subject that I cannot, through personal experience, agree on. I do not think LO's in any league system (BCA, APA, etc.) should be allowed to play on a team in their OWN league structure, not even during the regular session. I've seen more than once a LO playing on a team that had questionable things happen for players on his/her team that were beneficial for their teams. It wouldn't matter by the time playoffs came around that the LO couldn't play in them because the damage would have ALREADY been done. As far as "mingling" with other players, well, they should be doing that anyway, whether they play of not. You state that you played on a team with your LO and enjoyed it very much. Well that's all well and good because you apparently have an honest LO. I've been around a couple, one was just plain dishonest and the other did some things that were highly questionable, and they did things FOR their team. This disgusted me to the point of not playing in those leagues anymore. This is why I do not feel it appropriate to allow LO's to play within their own league system.

Shoot 'em well, my friend!!!

Maniac

i have thought about the angle of an lo helping his team through the regular session get to the playoffs. i tend to agree with your viewpoint. but here is another angle. once that team makes it to the playoffs they are on their own. if they can make it thru the playoffs, tri cups and cities on their own then they obviously did not need any help from him during the regular season.

you said i apparently have an honest lo . yea he is honest all right. he raised one of our players on his team in the middle of tri cups where we could not field our best players. i asked wth was up with that ? he said the players stats raised him . simple enough huh?

like you said it all boils down to having an honest lo. i just think rules barring any lo from having monetary incentive to help any team advancing in tournaments " especially one he plays on " would help eliminate situations such as what happened with jerrys team. apparently bcapl does not have any such rules in place.

 

[lorider]

Much respect, Maniac...

Define questionable.

There was a BCA league where I used to live, that the handicap formula was simple. Balls made divided by games played equaled your average.
(For those unfamiliar with BCA 8-Ball, each ball worth a point, the 8 is worth three points. So if a player had a 'ball count' of 354 over the course of 48 games, 354 divided by 48 equals 7.37. Which would translate to a 7.5 average).

Then one of the LO's got the 'bright idea' (after having been beaten by a first year team that was ranked appropriately, in my opinion) of factoring a certain percentage of your OPPONENT'S balls into the average formula.
(I felt they were ranked appropriately because both times WE played that team (double elimination playoffs), each match went to the final game. Basically, the LO's team didn't 'show up' table-wise, got slaughtered, and couldn't mentally accept the loss).

Now, the 'science' or 'dark art' of this new handicap system has never been explained correctly by any of the LO's. One tells me that the system takes your last 25 games history. Another tells me it's 'lifetime' (since the inception of the 'new' handicap system).
Coincidentally, since the implementation of the new system, save for one season. the LO's teams has consistently won the division. Hmm...

That's my definition of "questionable".

I mean, if there's a transparent handicap system in place, that's easy to understand, then I (personally) don't see a problem with an LO playing on a team.

So are talking about 'bad calls' kind of stuff ??

Mickey <--- Knows Mickey went on a rant, but is curious about Maniac's statement...

the fault in the situation you describe falls squarely on the shoulders of the national office. if lo's were not arbitrarily allowed to run their leagues as they please this situation would not come up.

again it all boils down to having an honest lo.

i have played bcapl, apa , napa, a traveling money league and an in house money league. the only dis honest lo i have encountered so far happened to be in bcapl.
imagine that !

 

[Maniac]

Much respect, Maniac...

Define questionable.

So are talking about 'bad calls' kind of stuff ??

Mickey <--- Knows Mickey went on a rant, but is curious about Maniac's statement...

Mickey,

Really, I'm sorry I even posted on this thread, at least this portion of it where we are discussing LO's and their actions. I have quietly dropped out of APA leagues and have mentally "let go" of any bad experiences I had with them and simply moved on. So, honestly and sincerely, I do not want to dredge up old news, pick the scab off of a healing wound, so-to-speak.

Again, I'm sorry for my lack of answering your question. I hope you understand.

Maniac

 

[frankncali]

I am guessing that the LO changed records from earlier in the year rather than later.

If not or even still why not just asked all the other players in the league and see what they say.

I am guessing that John P has lied and said he played. If not what they heck is going on with the ruling. A LO knowingly cheats and he is still a part of the organization. Doesnt make sense.

Only reason I wonder is because someone stated that Jerry had to make an apology. What did he apologize for? Sorry for cheating and being everything I am supposed to stand and guard against.

Whole thing seems odd to me... but hey I am sure there is worse done in both leagues. Heck might even be a thing called a ghost league

 

[Johnnyt]

How much money are we talking about for the winning team at nationals? Johnyt

 

[cardiac kid]

How much money are we talking about for the winning team at nationals? Johnyt

12K for first. 8K for second. Down a K each from 2012.

Lyn

 

[Johnnyt]

12K for first. 8K for second. Down a K each from 2012.

Lyn

In this day of lawsuits someone is going to see a crime here. Johnnyt

 

[dom_poppa]

I know some lawyers in AZ and if anyone wants to file a lawsuit, let me know. This is fraud. You guys can contact the FBI in your local area and gather witnesses to this John Doe or John P.

It's one thing to have accounting errors and it's another thing when league players have never seen a guy play before.

You can sue the league or you can sue the individual separately.

 

[dom_poppa]

12K for first. 8K for second. Down a K each from 2012.

Lyn

Definitely enough money for federal trial. It spread across the state and de-frauded 6000 players. Federal prison, 3 years in jail, 1 year max for good behavior.

Maybe you guys can get all 6000 players aware of the situation and file a class action suit.

 

[Lonestar_jim]

How did this start

Basically, yes, the AZ ratings were developed over 20 years ago and were first developed for use in 9-ball tournaments. Since then, there have been a several changes in the rating structure, and also in the way they are used in tournaments. Their biggest use these days are in scotch-doubles tournaments that have a cap on the combined rating that the teams can use. There are still some singles tournaments around that use the ratings to determine games-on-the-wire handicaps, but not very many.

The difficult thing here is that the BCAPL accepts AZ ratings in determining if an Arizona player should be classified as Open, Advanced, or Master in BCAPL events. This really get sticky sometimes because many people on the ratings committee are also active players in BCAPL pool leagues and BCAPL events.

Roger

Thanks for the reply Roger. So for states without an agreement with BCAPL, the normal way to determine open, advanced and master levels is through performance. Who proposed using the list to determine skill level (AZ or BCAPL)? And I understand that the player committee with the organization can use discretion to assign skill level based on known ability regardless of where the player is from. :wink:

 

[Roger Long]

Thanks for the reply Roger. So for states without an agreement with BCAPL, the normal way to determine open, advanced and master levels is through performance. Who proposed using the list to determine skill level (AZ or BCAPL)? And I understand that the player committee with the organization can use discretion to assign skill level based on known ability regardless of where the player is from. :wink:

I'm sorry, Jim, but I don't really know the answer to that question. I do know that the BCAPL had to have some way of classifying players between Open, Advanced, Master, and Grand Master when they came up with the new divisions a few years ago, and Arizona's tournament rating system seemed to offer them a convenient way of doing that with the Arizona BCAPL players. But I've often wondered how they handle it with players from other states. That's probably none of my business, though. :smile:

Roger