TPA versus Fargo

L

ldl01031

Member
First, yes, I know. TPA applies to a match, Fargo applies to overall results over time. And TPA doesn't take an opponent's skill into account.

But I'm curious. If someone maintains an 'average' TPA of .800 (what used to be called world-class), what might their equivalent Fargo be?
 
Billiard aptitude tests are a better indicator for potential Fargo than TPA. In the absence of fargo the TPA has limited correlation over time and different fields.

If you wanted a system to see which players could think and perform at a high fargo then check out the Harriman CueSport Prep Academy.

Juniors falter because they freeze up. Tate recently played the wrong ball due to color confusion. A player with a better aptitude would not have made that mistake.
 
ldl01031 said:
First, yes, I know. TPA applies to a match, Fargo applies to overall results over time. And TPA doesn't take an opponent's skill into account.

But I'm curious. If someone maintains an 'average' TPA of .800 (what used to be called world-class), what might their equivalent Fargo be?
Click to expand...

The 800 Fargo players are getting into TPA of .900 + in matches, often in the .950 range in sets and tournaments they win.
.850 was the "old" world class TPA, now it's competitive but won't win you many sets against the top 30/40 players.
Someone with an .800 match rating is likely a 700-750 Fargo, or someone a bit higher with a bad day against a strong opponent that did not let them to the table with opportunities. Imagine a top player in a race to 5 missing their second shot and the other guy runs out the set after that. The guy would end up a .500 on their rating without a chance to go up, but you need to see the match to understand why the rating was so low.
 
ldl01031 said:
First, yes, I know. TPA applies to a match, Fargo applies to overall results over time. And TPA doesn't take an opponent's skill into account.

But I'm curious. If someone maintains an 'average' TPA of .800 (what used to be called world-class), what might their equivalent Fargo be?
Click to expand...
I'd guess that a TPA of 800 translates to a Fargo of about 730.
 
garczar said:
That cat is clueless. Wow. He's basically saying that if one is good at drills/tests that they'd be good in a
Click to expand...
Exactly. Pressure is everything. There are lots of golfers, pool players that play like champions but put them on the PGA tour or in a pool tournament or gambling and their skill erodes immensely. Pressure
 
iusedtoberich said:
I think Pat would say something like 850 is pro level. But world class is more like 950 if I recall.
Click to expand...
World class is a lot less than .950. I'd guess only about five pro players play at an average TPA of .900. It's easier to get to Fargo 800 than to average a .900 TPA in all tournament play.

There are pros who go a whole career without producing a .950 set in competition.

I'd call .880 world class, and my guess is that it maps roughly to a Fargo 800.

Of course, what "world class" means can be debated, but those are my thoughts.
 
Last edited:
Good points, I didn’t read the statement well.

I meant a stellar, world class “single” match. Those are the ones that are 940-950 range.

A long term average I’d agree no pro is averaging 950.

I guess we (me at least) are a lot more familiar with Fargo ratings than accustats TPA ratings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sjm
Mean of Accu-Stats Match TPAs for Derby City Classic 9-Ball

These averages are for the streamed matches for which TPAs were given by Accu-Stats -- 7 matches in 2022, 8 matches in 2020, 8 matches in 2019, 10 matches in 2018, 7 in 2017, 9 in 2016, 9 in 2015, and 6 in 2014.

[Note -- TPAs were given for only 4 matches in 2023. The averages were .921 for match winners, .684 for losers, and .803 in total. But I have excluded 2023 from the figures shown below because of the small number of matches represented.]

For match winners​
2022 -- .925​
2020 -- .912​
2019 -- .915​
2018 -- .897​
2017 -- .897​
2016 -- .921​
2015 -- .902​
2014 -- .898​
8-year total -- .908​
​
For match losers​
2022 -- .875​
2020 -- .800​
2019 -- .837​
2018 -- .823​
2017 -- .805​
2016 -- .831​
2015 -- .697 (.784 excluding one zero TPA)​
2014 -- .806​
8-year total -- .809 (.820)​
​
For both winners and losers​
2022 -- .901​
2020 -- .856​
2019 -- .876​
2018 -- .860​
2017 -- .851​
2016 -- .876​
2015 -- .800 (.847)​
2014 -- .852​
8-year total -- .859 (.865)​

[Note: These mean values are likely to be a little different from aggregate TPAs calculated for each of the 3 groups.]
 
Billiard aptitude tests are a better indicator for potential Fargo than TPA. In the absence of fargo the TPA has limited correlation over time and different fields.
If you wanted a system to see which players could think and perform at a high fargo then check out the Harriman CueSport Prep Academy.
Juniors falter because they freeze up. Tate recently played the wrong ball due to color confusion. A player with a better aptitude would not have made that mistake.

I think shooting that shit purple 5 ball would be an easy mistake. I get it confused every time I watch matchroom. That Tate kids plays at a 700+ fargo. I thought he showed great aptitude on the table. The only way you could ever help him is to buy a ticket to watch.
 
Here's a comparison of the 8-year TPA totals (2014-2022) for 9-Ball shown in Post #14 above with 7-year totals (2016-2023) for the DCC Bigfoot events. Kind of surprising.

9-foot 9-Ball​
Match winners -- .908​
Match losers -- .820​
Both -- .865​
​
10-foot 10-Ball​
Match winners -- .886​
Match losers -- .818​
Both -- .852​
 
Last edited:
The first great billiard game was straight pool. The accustats TPA is based on 14.1 history.
Ball made over balls made and errors.

A perfect game means no errors.
Similar to bowlings strike or golfs hole in one.

Fargo is more like a GPA, grade point average for schools. Higher is better and most people are average.

In the pool world players should focus on TPA. Backers should focus on Fargo.

To build on the Fleming measure, we can create types of errors. Most errors in pool are make the shot and scratch, wrong power, wrong stroke, wrong amount of chalk or wrong aim.

TPA refinement can lead to better pool slogans. Avoiding Errors on the 9 ball can be a threshold for bangers to cross when they are ready. TPA development will be on types of errors during a match. A system the Harriman Academy is working on.


Fargo is better for predicting conditions. In combat sports a person with reach has a clear strategy. In pool players dont know when to pass on an open shot. The common strategy is pocketing skills. Higher fargo means player dodges or pockets better. Lower fargo will have to play better percentage shots to compensate for lack of ability. It provides a good lesson in patience.

DrDave has a good description of TPA formula.

Accu-Stats TPA Player Rating System - Dr. Dave Pool Info

Answers to frequently-asked questions about Accu-Stats' TPA rating system.
billiards.colostate.edu billiards.colostate.edu
 
AtLarge said:
... These averages are for the streamed matches for which TPAs were given by Accu-Stats
Click to expand...
Ideally the averages would count total shots and total errors for each player but those are hard to find.
 
FunChamp said:
Exactly. Pressure is everything. There are lots of golfers, pool players that play like champions but put them on the PGA tour or in a pool tournament or gambling and their skill erodes immensely. Pressure
Click to expand...
Exactly right! It's a bit like comparing what happens on the pistol range to actual combat.

As the saying goes "it's a different game when someone is shooting back."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top