Vegas BCAPL 2016, fargorate problems

[sbpoolleague]

My prediction. The winning team in the lower division will be composed of mostly unrated players in the fargo rating system.

OK...so suppose we did NOT use Fargo ratings, and that team of 5 "unrated" players you talk about signs up for the team event. Since they are "unrated", that is, they are NOT on any BCAPL Advanced, Master, or Grand Master list, they WOULD qualify to play in the Open team event.

So what is different? These "unrated" players STILL win the Open team event.

Of course the Fargo ratings are currently far from comprehensive, but they are rapidly getting better, and after this years BCAPL Nationals they will include everyone that played in a singles or team event. The nationwide exposure to Fargo ratings at this year's Nationals will undoubtedly result in league operators and local tournament directors adding Fargo ratings to their leagues/events.

I maintain that using Fargo ratings to divide the divisions at this year's Nationals is AT THE VERY LEAST just as good as the system used in previous years for dividing divisions. The fact is that using Fargo ratings for this year's event is MUCH BETTER than the system used in previous years, because all those players that have played in several years of Nationals have an established and accurate rating.

 

[HelloBaby-]

OK...so suppose we did NOT use Fargo ratings, and that team of 5 "unrated" players you talk about signs up for the team event. Since they are "unrated", that is, they are NOT on any BCAPL Advanced, Master, or Grand Master list, they WOULD qualify to play in the Open team event.

So what is different? These "unrated" players STILL win the Open team event.

Of course the Fargo ratings are currently far from comprehensive, but they are rapidly getting better, and after this years BCAPL Nationals they will include everyone that played in a singles or team event. The nationwide exposure to Fargo ratings at this year's Nationals will undoubtedly result in league operators and local tournament directors adding Fargo ratings to their leagues/events.

I maintain that using Fargo ratings to divide the divisions at this year's Nationals is AT THE VERY LEAST just as good as the system used in previous years for dividing divisions. The fact is that using Fargo ratings for this year's event is MUCH BETTER than the system used in previous years, because all those players that have played in several years of Nationals have an established and accurate rating.

Agree, don't know why the thread opener blames Fargo for the "unrated" players lol, Does he realize that if a guy is unknown, then he is unknown, period. lol :banghead:

Fargo is the BEST "radar" so far, period. If a guy shows up in a regional or even foreign tournament, he will be caught.
Compare it to some guys who won a bunch of not-too-small regional or foreign tourneys but never play BCA (I know for fact some "Mexican champions" and "small town champions" who would be a advance or master easily) , with the old system he would be still open player.
Kind of a no-brainer to me to use Fargo, why so much discussion :deadhorse:

 

[watchez]

The same unknown, unrated players that are a 525 would be classified as Open under the old BCAPL. Fargo isn't doing anything to change that. It just put a number by them and put them at the bottom of the category. Maybe some rating in the middle or top of the category would have been better.

Anything has to be better than what I saw in who was rated an 'Open' player last year in the people that finished high in the singles events.

Lyn - if you are a 611 or whatever you are now, it is best to be seen and not heard. You should be THRILLED with your rating.

 

[ShortBusRuss]

I am hoping to have everyone complaining about my team this year, lol...

We are 7 points under the 3000 cutoff.

For the record, we only got top 32 last year, so we are where we belong, IMHO...

Short Bus Russ - C Player

P.S. For the record... Yes, I am the worst player on the team.

 

[poolscholar]

Would like to see a reply from a BCA/CSI rep...

 

[poolscholar]

OK...so suppose we did NOT use Fargo ratings, and that team of 5 "unrated" players you talk about signs up for the team event. Since they are "unrated", that is, they are NOT on any BCAPL Advanced, Master, or Grand Master list, they WOULD qualify to play in the Open team event.

So what is different? These "unrated" players STILL win the Open team event.

Of course the Fargo ratings are currently far from comprehensive, but they are rapidly getting better, and after this years BCAPL Nationals they will include everyone that played in a singles or team event. The nationwide exposure to Fargo ratings at this year's Nationals will undoubtedly result in league operators and local tournament directors adding Fargo ratings to their leagues/events.

I maintain that using Fargo ratings to divide the divisions at this year's Nationals is AT THE VERY LEAST just as good as the system used in previous years for dividing divisions. The fact is that using Fargo ratings for this year's event is MUCH BETTER than the system used in previous years, because all those players that have played in several years of Nationals have an established and accurate rating.

As explained before, this would punish teams that are rated as they would have a lower total rating than many teams with unrated players. If you increase the starting rating of unrated players, then it eliminates this problem.

For example here's a good team for the lower division

700 (top amateur/almost pro)
700
525 (unrated)
525 (unrated)
525 (unrated)

equals 2975 (below the 3000 cap for lower div). The unrated players could easily be 100 points underrated each, putting this team above the max rating for the upper division and at least as good as the best fully rated upper division teams

 

[ShortBusRuss]

For example here's a good team for the lower division

700 (top amateur/almost pro)
700
525 (unrated)
525 (unrated)
525 (unrated)

equals 2975 (below the 3000 cap for lower div). The unrated players could easily be 100 points underrated each, putting this team above the max rating for the upper division and at least as good as the best fully rated upper division teams

Yeah, it's possible... But unlikely that there would be many teams like that... You'd be surprised how hard it is to find two 700's and three 625's in the same area, with all three 625's being unknown at the national level. A 625 is a pretty darn good player. To find three that played at that level who've never been to BCA/VNEA state or national tournaments? Very unlikely.

Besides that... 700 level players are NOT a dime a dozen, either. We have a very strong barbox contingent in Colorado.. Our teams did quite well last year at BCA, one team in the top 5 of the Open.

Marc Vidal is the best barbox player in Colorado.. He is only 725 Fargo Rate. if I had to estimate, we have maybe five 700+ players in the entire region.

And another thing to think about... No matter how good the local players "think" that "underrated" 625 is... If they haven't competed at the national level, then they are unproven. The pressure of your team being down 3-4 games and you MUST run out, is something you have to have experienced.

I think a 3000 cap for the lower division is just about right, and I don't see any Master level teams being built to snap off an easy win. The Masters are all known players and Fargo ranked nationally.

Short Bus Russ - C Player

 

[nine_ball6970]

Yeah, it's possible... But unlikely that there would be many teams like that... You'd be surprised how hard it is to find two 700's and three 625's in the same area, with all three 625's being unknown at the national level. A 625 is a pretty darn good player. To find three that played at that level who've never been to BCA/VNEA state or national tournaments? Very unlikely.

Besides that... 700 level players are NOT a dime a dozen, either. We have a very strong barbox contingent in Colorado.. Our teams did quite well last year at BCA, one team in the top 5 of the Open.

Marc Vidal is the best barbox player in Colorado.. He is only 725 Fargo Rate. if I had to estimate, we have maybe five 700+ players in the entire region.

And another thing to think about... No matter how good the local players "think" that "underrated" 625 is... If they haven't competed at the national level, then they are unproven. The pressure of your team being down 3-4 games and you MUST run out, is something you have to have experienced.

I think a 3000 cap for the lower division is just about right, and I don't see any Master level teams being built to snap off an easy win. The Masters are all known players and Fargo ranked nationally.

Short Bus Russ - C Player

I could easily fill a team using the above criteria. We have at least five 700+ players who play out of my room. Many of the stronger players only play teams at Nationals so are basically unknown as far as Fargo. Lots of fairly strong players in my room have the 525 starter rating.

I have played State and Nationals teams for the past three years and I only have 19 games in the Fargo database.

The flyer for Texas State tournament next week states there is a penalty for going over the 3,000 point cap of either one game for every 40 points or taking a player off of your roster to stay under the 3,000 points. I would imagine this same language is would be in the entry form for Nationals.

 

[T-dog]

Would like to see a reply from a BCA/CSI rep...

I would too. I have never been to BCA. I was told by one rep that I am a 525....then another rep told me 625 because of some local tourneys i have won over the years.

 

[fastone371]

We just completed our BCAPL tournament using Fargo ratings a couple weeks ago, I think it worked out great. There are many local people commenting that they did not think they were playing a fair race in singles when 1 player had ti get 6 and another player only had to go to 3, after the matches they felt it was fair race. My singles matches that I lost on both the winners and losers side went hill/hill, when using last years letter system instead of Fargo I would not have even been in the same division of at least one of my opponents.
As far as team goes there were many people complaining about our team being in the lower division because we had 1 of the top players in our state on our team. The captain then picked 4 players who's numbers would put us right at the cap with 1 or 2 of those being "under the radar" people. We lost both of our first 2 matches for an early exit in hill/hill matches. One was 11-7, we needed 12, other team 7, second match we lost 12/11, both teams had to go to 12. The team we played where both went to 12 I knew all of them and they were all pretty evenly matched players. The team races just are not long enough where the higher rated players are going to make a big difference. In a hill/hill match a pro on your team can only get you 5 wins at the most, if he takes a loss, which isnt that unexpected in bar box 8 ball, it is a huge penalty for the points he takes up on your roster. I think in the end most people who want to compete will be happy with the Fargo system, those who want to steal probably wont like it so much.

 

[ShortBusRuss]

I could easily fill a team using the above criteria. We have at least five 700+ players who play out of my room. Many of the stronger players only play teams at Nationals so are basically unknown as far as Fargo. Lots of fairly strong players in my room have the 525 starter rating.

I have played State and Nationals teams for the past three years and I only have 19 games in the Fargo database.

The flyer for Texas State tournament next week states there is a penalty for going over the 3,000 point cap of either one game for every 40 points or taking a player off of your roster to stay under the 3,000 points. I would imagine this same language is would be in the entry form for Nationals.

If you are in TX, then by all means, do so, and snap off that event...

I lived in TX for a year, and can categorically say.. You might have some good players, but finding 3 "unknown" players who shoot at 625 speed? Good luck.

As an example... Rick Stanley... A good player to be sure, but in his area, he is a big fish, in a small pond. I went to his area one time and ended up playing well and won against him in his home room 9 ball tournament. He's one of the better players in all of Texas... He can easily spot 90% of the state playing either 9 ball or 8 ball. He's right around 675 - 700. I think. I played him barbox 8 ball a few times, as well.

What i am trying to say is this.... I have a few guys on my team that are 600+, LEGITIMATELY by Fargo rating.... And, they can have their moments.

Unless you can stack a full team of 650+ (which I am saying would be extremely hard to do.... And I've played in TX...) of any combination of knowns and unknowns, then that team is not a lock to win the Open class.

I am a legitimate 558 Fargo rated player, with results at one BCA nationals to back that up. In barbox 8 ball, I won a very large percentage of the 8 man 8 ball minis I played at BCA.

I played a guy in the singles that ran his first four racks... And I still won.

Barbox 8 ball is a whole different beast. Most "good" players don't play it NEARLY as well as they play 9 ball.

Again.. If you have that many unknown monsters, then by all means, you ought to be able to easily form a team and get that easy money in Vegas in July. :thumbup:

Short Bus Russ - C player

 

[mikepage]

As explained before, this would punish teams that are rated as they would have a lower total rating than many teams with unrated players. If you increase the starting rating of unrated players, then it eliminates this problem.

For example here's a good team for the lower division

700 (top amateur/almost pro)
700
525 (unrated)
525 (unrated)
525 (unrated)

equals 2975 (below the 3000 cap for lower div). The unrated players could easily be 100 points underrated each, putting this team above the max rating for the upper division and at least as good as the best fully rated upper division teams

If your point is that you can conceive of a way to use unrated players for an advantage, then I don't disagree with that.

At the same time please be aware that you are talking to the people--me and others around me--who are working harder than anyone else on planet Earth to address that problem. I don't mind being forthright and discussing issues openly and honestly. I must say, though, that discussing these issues in a thread titled "fargorate problems" feels a little unfair to me. There is just no revelation here.

While your example is conceivable, I think you exaggerate its likelihood.

You need to find three people who

---are not on our radar
---play at 600+ speed
---play the required weeks in a sanctioned BCAPL league
---are willing to band together to go to vegas on a team

Then you need to find a couple 700-level players who are willing to play on a team and also willing to join the above three (as opposed to being committed to another team).

Again, I'm not saying it can't happen. And I'm not saying it won't happen. But I honestly believe these sorts of situations--megateams coming out of the weeds--will be a notably smaller problem this year than ever before.

 

[poolscholar]

If your point is that you can conceive of a way to use unrated players for an advantage, then I don't disagree with that.

At the same time please be aware that you are talking to the people--me and others around me--who are working harder than anyone else on planet Earth to address that problem. I don't mind being forthright and discussing issues openly and honestly. I must say, though, that discussing these issues in a thread titled "fargorate problems" feels a little unfair to me. There is just no revelation here.

While your example is conceivable, I think you exaggerate its likelihood.

You need to find three people who

---are not on our radar
---play at 600+ speed
---play the required weeks in a sanctioned BCAPL league
---are willing to band together to go to vegas on a team

Then you need to find a couple 700-level players who are willing to play on a team and also willing to join the above three (as opposed to being committed to another team).

Again, I'm not saying it can't happen. And I'm not saying it won't happen. But I honestly believe these sorts of situations--megateams coming out of the weeds--will be a notably smaller problem this year than ever before.

I doesn't have to be likely, you just need one team that steamrolls the division.

Why not increase the unrated starting rating or cap the number of unrated players? Afraid of low turnout?

What is the thinking behind these decisions? Perhaps someone working for the tournament can chime in...

 

[Banks]

I doesn't have to be likely, you just need one team that steamrolls the division.

Why not increase the unrated starting rating or cap the number of unrated players? Afraid of low turnout?

What is the thinking behind these decisions? Perhaps someone working for the tournament can chime in...

I'd be willing to bet that any team coming in for the open with a couple of 700-ish level players along with three unrateds is going to trigger about every radar they've got.

 

[watchez]

Mike Page - I sent you a private message on Facebook. Can you respond to it?

Thanks

 

[poolscholar]

I'd be willing to bet that any team coming in for the open with a couple of 700-ish level players along with three unrateds is going to trigger about every radar they've got.

If they could give us some reassurance they will be evaluating and watching for teams like this and adjusting them at the tournament, then I'd be feel better about signing up my team. Or adjusting individual ratings during the team tournament. I haven't heard any solutions in this thread accept "we've thought about this a lot".

Not trying to pick a fight, I think fargorate is great. But honestly, I may not attend this year because I feel like I can't put a competitive team together. Either the upper div cap needs to be raised, or they need to control the unrated players more in the lower div.

 

[mikepage]

Mike Page - I sent you a private message on Facebook. Can you respond to it?

Thanks

I don't see a facebook message

 

[watchez]

I don't see a facebook message

Ok sent you a PM here

 

[nine_ball6970]

If you are in TX, then by all means, do so, and snap off that event...

I lived in TX for a year, and can categorically say.. You might have some good players, but finding 3 "unknown" players who shoot at 625 speed? Good luck.

As an example... Rick Stanley... A good player to be sure, but in his area, he is a big fish, in a small pond. I went to his area one time and ended up playing well and won against him in his home room 9 ball tournament. He's one of the better players in all of Texas... He can easily spot 90% of the state playing either 9 ball or 8 ball. He's right around 675 - 700. I think. I played him barbox 8 ball a few times, as well.

What i am trying to say is this.... I have a few guys on my team that are 600+, LEGITIMATELY by Fargo rating.... And, they can have their moments.

Unless you can stack a full team of 650+ (which I am saying would be extremely hard to do.... And I've played in TX...) of any combination of knowns and unknowns, then that team is not a lock to win the Open class.

I am a legitimate 558 Fargo rated player, with results at one BCA nationals to back that up. In barbox 8 ball, I won a very large percentage of the 8 man 8 ball minis I played at BCA.

I played a guy in the singles that ran his first four racks... And I still won.

Barbox 8 ball is a whole different beast. Most "good" players don't play it NEARLY as well as they play 9 ball.

Again.. If you have that many unknown monsters, then by all means, you ought to be able to easily form a team and get that easy money in Vegas in July. :thumbup:

Short Bus Russ - C player

There are probably a dozen 600-625 players in my area that would not be known to many people outside of the area. When there are 2 million people in your area, there are bound to be some strong players.

Rick Stanley is definitely a good player but he is not the caliber of the top players in Texas. Texas is an ocean with more than a couple sharks. Top players would be guys like Charlie Bryant, Manny Chau, Sylver Ochoa, Jeremy Jones, etc.

I do not go to Vegas unless my team qualifies. We lost in the finals of our league tournament 13-11. Maybe we will win the next qualifier.

There is no such thing as easy money in Nationals. Need a strong team to be firing on all cylinders consistently and get a couple rolls along the way.

At least we won't have to worry about teams named Pro Masters playing in the Open Division.

 

[mikepage]

Rick Stanley is definitely a good player but he is not the caliber of the top players in Texas. Texas is an ocean with more than a couple sharks. Top players would be guys like Charlie Bryant, Manny Chau, Sylver Ochoa, Jeremy Jones, etc.

All four you mention are above Rick for Fargo Rating. There may be some high level players we have listed under another state as well.