[UPDATED] APA complaint advice - My new-to-pool player went to a 7 in 7 matches (?!?!)
- Thread starter imbillmoney
- Start date
I have to apologize and make a correction. We were both right and we were both wrong. The handicap is not based off of individual games, or total Innings and safetys for a match. It is based off an AVERAGE of innings (minus safety's) of your games won. Not just total innings.
For instance if you had 13 innings in four games won, with one safety. Subtracting the safety, that would be 12 innings in four games, or an average of 3 Innings per game. If your applied score (based on your handicap level and win percentage) is lower then 3, the applied score gets used.
I apologize for the confusion.
Last edited:
I am pretty sure their formula has changed since that court case left some of their information out of the bag. With advances in computer / machine learning I am 99% sure their formula is more adaptive than just calculating raw data. At a minimum the formula would be doing some predictive analysis and weighting of some of the raw data based on trends.
Think of things in the formula like the difference between the opponents average scores for that match (opponent usually have 10 innings per match, but won this match in 5 innings). The computer might put less weight on your score for this match because the opponent had an unusually good match. Take that a step further and if the computer sees a trend that for some reason all your opponents have unusually good matches against you it may make some assumptions on that fact as well. If the computer sees that everyone you play has higher innings average than their normal against you, it might lower your average inning count to account for scorekeepers not marking defensive shots appropriately.
I am not saying these exact examples are currently part of the formula, just giving one or two of a million different types of stuff that could be included in the formula.
In short, the formula does a pretty good job with 98% of the players, esp once they become established. My only complaint is there is too much of a skill gap within the levels but I understand they need to keep it as simple as possible so people don't mess it up all the time.
You have a lot of misunderstandings. It's not clear whether that stems from a lack of information, or erroneous information processing, or both. No offense, but in this thread, it seems "common sense" means "Irrationally mishandling faulty information". Sorry...call it like I see it.Oh, I don't know, common sense. I guess after 7 baseball games, lets just give someone the MVP award and call it a day. Dude plays seven matches and he's at the top of the top players in the league. Sorry, homie no play that game
Yes, I didn't mention the applied score because I was replying to something else. Namely your error about the average innings. I'm extremely familiar with how applied scores work. You're still not quite understanding what information feeds into your handicap. Have you ever watched a scoresheet get keyed into the APA computer? My guess is not, or else you were perhaps paying attention to something else at the time. They don't enter innings for individual games.
KMRUNOUT
Yes. That was an error on my part. And I corrected it. It's not the average innings for the whole match, or per game. Just the average innings for the games that you won.
I will start by saying I never played in APA. It seems to me that the problem with APA's "adjustments" is that according to just about every APA player it pretty much takes a supreme court ruling to have a player "adjusted" to a lower SL, say from an SL7 down to an SL6. It is very possible that a new player could be on a "hot streak" or "lucky streak" early in their APA career and be "penalized" by being rated too high. With Fargo you rating will most likely change after every match, especially with a robustness less than 1,000, it is not more difficult for your rating to go down than it is for it to go up. It also seems that APA ratings are pretty broad, like that there can be a pretty big difference in ability between two SL5's or two SL7's.What if he really is a 7? He'd be underrated in every match until he got there. I think you should always take your best guess, even if you only have seven data points. I guess you're saying it's better to be too low than too high. Equating it to a baseball MVP is absurd, too, but you already know that
I especially like the way you and others praise Fargo for acknowledging that it takes hundreds of samples to have a reasonably accurate rating, or at least reasonable confidence in the rating you have (it could actually be spot on after a single match) but when APA acknowledges the very same concept (it's even in the team manual), you scoff at them. You say Fargo ratings get "recalculated" but APA ratings get "adjusted" or "bumped", when in fact they just get "recalculated" too. Apply a formula to the data you have and you get today's result. They're both the same in that respect - only the formula and the data are different, and they have to be because they serve different purposes. It's like Fargo invented math or something. It's nothing new, Fargo just publishes more buckets. APA has them, but chooses not to publish them, for their players' purposes they're not required - they don't change races.
It's very possible they improved upon the program. But fundamentally should be pretty close to the same.
Last edited:
Oh, yes hilarious, that's never been said on the internet, like 1 million times and counting. WOW.
These two bolded phrased are identical. The total innings of the match is the the total innings of individual games.
Each match is scored individually. (Total Innings of the match - defensive shots)/(# of wins) is that match's raw number before Applied Innings is ... applied.
When your a new player your skill ranking can move all over the place pretty easily. I have seen people start as a 3 (everyone pretty much does), move to a 6 the next week, then move to a 4 the following week. stay there for a few weeks then move back to a 3 and then ultimatly end up as a 5 all in their first 10 matches. Once you are established (20 games) it is very hard to move down in skill level if you are winning matches, but if your losing matches you will gradually move down as long as your stats (innings mainly) make sense. A new player on a hot streak (or lucky) is a couple of matches, not extended out over 10 or 20 matches. If they can sustain the higher level of play over a longer period of time, it more than likely isn't a hot streak or lucky streak anymore.
this, everyone always complains about something because pool players dont like anything
Almost there. You had it right (games won), so the bold should say "per win." That's the fundamental piece of the APA Equalizer. Innings per win, as you were really going to write.
So if you had 13 innings, and the final score was 4-2 in your favor, then it's 13 total innings, then substract safeties, and then divide by 4 wins.
I’m not complaining , I’ve been around pool rooms and handicap systems for 36 years. Just calling as I see it. I’m a gambler anyways so I’ve always cut my own deals. I don’t need some “system” to guide me through the murky waters of pool.
Is that complaining?
Have a nice day and shoot straight,
kindest regards
Fatboy
What I will complain about is poorly set up equipment and balls rolling off. That pisses me off more than anything I can think of right now. When a good table is poorly installed.
all the best
Fatboy<——-professional 3C rail bird
thats an esay one, just dont play on shit tables, i choose not to anymore.
if you have the choice.
fat texas guy<------doesnt play 3c
Yes. I didn't edit that post yet... but I will.
I remember when the SL7 on my current team started playing APA. He was on a different team at the time, and many of us certainly knew how good he was. He started as a SL4 like every male did at the time. I felt it was gonna be fun to see how long it took him to get to SL7.
During that session, I played him even up as SL5. Of course he smoked me, but we had fun. (We used to play regularly on weekends at our club, along with several others.)
I'm not sure if he got there in 7 games or not, but I doubt it took 10.
During that session, I played him even up as SL5. Of course he smoked me, but we had fun. (We used to play regularly on weekends at our club, along with several others.)
I'm not sure if he got there in 7 games or not, but I doubt it took 10.
JC
Coos Cues
Why does it not surprise me that a format like APA also has jinky software?See if this helps to make sense of it....
From Dr Dave's website....
APA Equalizer Handicapping System - Dr. Dave Pool Info
Answers to frequently-asked questions about the APA Equalizer handicapping system.billiards.colostate.edu
After you read this, you will see that it's the software that in deciding handicap. Yes, the league operator can move handicaps up and down, but they have to come up with a good reason to override the software.
As you can see, the handicap is not only based on innings, but win percentage as well. And it uses your best 10 games of the last 20 played. It is very hard to move down in handicap with over a 50% win percentage.