Will Fargo update there app new features?

They have had this in a simple text format in USCF for at least 20 years or so at this point. Not sure why Mike Page is trying to reinvent the wheel, instead of just following the USCF template. It's fantastic, and really generates interest in tournaments.

Actually, I DO know why. USCF shows ALL tournament results, for ALL players, to anyone with a web browser. Pool players don't want "all" their results so readily available to anyone with an internet connection, as it may prevent them from hustling someone for a $100 race to 7. And Mike Page is pandering to that element, with one of the major failings of the system is allowing people to "share or not share" their results.

The gambling motive to hide one's true skill in pool is absolutely toxic to a rating system trying to gather, and disseminate data about all games.

The difference between some other organizations and pool is that those other all are run centrally and feed into a single central ranking system. Pool has either no organization with local tournaments or too many organizations with APA, TAP, USAPL, Matchroom, Predator, WPA, UPA, NAPA, etc.. all collecting their own fees and data for their own events. Only issue with Fargo is the issue that nothing can really force players or events to add matches to the system and to play honestly.

I would bet that if some guy went to play in a NY park for $500 in chess, they are not too worried about reporting that result to the Chess Federation, same as with any private or random game/set/match one may play in pool.
 
Last edited:
I second the idea of a time-series graph of a player's rating, say one point at the first of the month over two years. It would be nice to see if players are getting stronger.
 
They have had this in a simple text format in USCF for at least 20 years or so at this point. Not sure why Mike Page is trying to reinvent the wheel, instead of just following the USCF template. It's fantastic, and really generates interest in tournaments.

Actually, I DO know why. USCF shows ALL tournament results, for ALL players, to anyone with a web browser. Pool players don't want "all" their results so readily available to anyone with an internet connection, as it may prevent them from hustling someone for a $100 race to 7. And Mike Page is pandering to that element, with one of the major failings of the system is allowing people to "share or not share" their results.

The gambling motive to hide one's true skill in pool is absolutely toxic to a rating system trying to gather, and disseminate data about all games.
How do you intend to make everyone running a tournament post their results to Fargo?? It has nothing to do with Mike Page "pandering" to hustlers and everything to do with a TD's willingness to report tournament results.
 
Mike Page very often comments on threads related to Fargo. You do have the option of sending him a message instead of waiting for him to just pop by.

No, that's the whole point of this thread. Like to see his idea's share it with everyone.
 
If I play a “friendly“ chess match against you for $100, that result shows in USCF?

Or just tournaments that are run under the auspices of USCF?

Are there not tournaments anywhere, that are not run under the auspices of USCF?
Yeah, probably. Like those in old folks homes and such. I would guess at something like 90% of the tournaments held in the U.S. are USCF-rated,and that number is likely a little low. The USCF rating is the entire POINT of playing chess tournaments in the U.S.. Even the smallest chess clubs will often hold two tournaments a week, something like a 4 round Swiss 15 minutes per player event during the week, and a 4-5 round Swiss 30 minute event on a Saturday or Sunday.

Kids can get pretty obsessive about playing as many rated tournaments as humanly possible, because they are in their prime improvement window, and can see ratings jumps of a hundred points in a month or two.

Sure, there is "some" gambling in chess, but the number of games with money on the line is so dwarfed by those either played for fun, or for ratings, that gambling in chess is basically a non-issue. Like, 1 out of a thousand games? Serious chess players play to improve, not to win money. Those Central Park chess players? Are by and large hacks who just study tactics books,never reach above USCF 1800 level, and are destroyed by any passing master who chooses to amuse themselves by teaching them a lesson. And most of the games are in the $5-$20 level.

The point I am trying to make is... The USCF rating system, and how they track it, if mirrored onto Fargorate, will open up ALL match scores for perusal by potential "pigeons". It doesn't really matter if there are other tournaments that do not use Fargorate. If a "hustler" ever gets into a single large events and goes for the cash and plays full bore, then there is a record of who they played, what their opponent's Fargorates are, and what the match score is. That is VERY good information on accurately clocking a player's speed. You get a performance measurement of how the player does "when they are really trying".

Everything I have seen re: chess ratings says that it encourages people to play more. But it also discourages gambling, because it is very clear what the mathematical expectation is for player A versus player B. So the gamblers in pool will likely revolt if full match score tracking ever comes to Fargorate.

What the pool community in America needs to decide is... Whether they wanna gamble, while they watch the game slowly die, or whether they want to try something different that encourages people to play and improve. What I know is this... I haven't picked up a cue in a month. If Germany had local level Fargo rated tournaments, I would likely play 2-4 tournaments a month.
 
Last edited:
How do you intend to make everyone running a tournament post their results to Fargo?? It has nothing to do with Mike Page "pandering" to hustlers and everything to do with a TD's willingness to report tournament results.
You don't have to "force" anyone to do anything. If the full data set, including individual match scores, and a full tournament bracket,are in the data for anyone to review, then people will want to play more Fargorated tournaments, and will change their tournament planning to do so. And then the ones who don't use Fargorate will be forced to do so.

Trust me.. There's something about being able to go back and pull match scores from a tournament that you played well in, that goes FAR beyond the actual $500 or so you might have earned from a small regional event. You can both prove to yourself, and others in your pool hall that you mowed down a strong field, and "performed like a 700 Fargorate", if only for one tournament. You can also directly measure your improvement between two tournaments where you got the exact same result, 9th-12th. People don't get so encouraged as when they simply measure their progress by money made, or placing achieved.

In chess, there are specific skills that need to be improved to move up 50 points, just like pool, but with a different set of skills. End game execution in chess versus straight in shot accuracy, etc. Folks get pretty obsessive in chess working to improve their skills that 50 points, and there is no reason to think the same effect would not be seen in pool.
 
I second the idea of a time-series graph of a player's rating, say one point at the first of the month over two years. It would be nice to see if players are getting stronger.
We recently added a Fargo Rating time series graph in Digital Pool under each user profile. You can look up any player and under stats tab you can see their overall win/loss record, best tournament finish and their Fargo Rating History for the last 25 tournaments they played in. We plan to add a match history section as well to show all previous matches, scores and their opponent Fargo ratings during that event. We can also calculate relative Fargo performance ratings for single tournaments and will be doing a lot more with that also. We submit over 30,000 tournament matches to Fargo on avg. per month now so there's a lot we can do.

Check the stats tab under this example - https://digitalpool.com/users/aaron-rubin
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2022-12-12 at 11.41.16 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2022-12-12 at 11.41.16 PM.png
    143.7 KB · Views: 106
We recently added a Fargo Rating time series graph in Digital Pool under each user profile. You can look up any player and under stats tab you can see their overall win/loss record, best tournament finish and their Fargo Rating History for the last 25 tournaments they played in. ...
Is that for all of their Fargo games or only the ones Digital Pool handles?
 
Yeah, probably. Like those in old folks homes and such. I would guess at something like 90% of the tournaments held in the U.S. are USCF-rated,and that number is likely a little low. The USCF rating is the entire POINT of playing chess tournaments in the U.S.. Even the smallest chess clubs will often hold two tournaments a week, something like a 4 round Swiss 15 minutes per player event during the week, and a 4-5 round Swiss 30 minute event on a Saturday or Sunday.

Kids can get pretty obsessive about playing as many rated tournaments as humanly possible, because they are in their prime improvement window, and can see ratings jumps of a hundred points in a month or two.

Sure, there is "some" gambling in chess, but the number of games with money on the line is so dwarfed by those either played for fun, or for ratings, that gambling in chess is basically a non-issue. Like, 1 out of a thousand games? Serious chess players play to improve, not to win money. Those Central Park chess players? Are by and large hacks who just study tactics books,never reach above USCF 1800 level, and are destroyed by any passing master who chooses to amuse themselves by teaching them a lesson. And most of the games are in the $5-$20 level.

The point I am trying to make is... The USCF rating system, and how they track it, if mirrored onto Fargorate, will open up ALL match scores for perusal by potential "pigeons". It doesn't really matter if there are other tournaments that do not use Fargorate. If a "hustler" ever gets into a single large events and goes for the cash and plays full bore, then there is a record of who they played, what their opponent's Fargorates are, and what the match score is. That is VERY good information on accurately clocking a player's speed. You get a performance measurement of how the player does "when they are really trying".

Everything I have seen re: chess ratings says that it encourages people to play more. But it also discourages gambling, because it is very clear what the mathematical expectation is for player A versus player B. So the gamblers in pool will likely revolt if full match score tracking ever comes to Fargorate.

What the pool community in America needs to decide is... Whether they wanna gamble, while they watch the game slowly die, or whether they want to try something different that encourages people to play and improve. What I know is this... I haven't picked up a cue in a month. If Germany had local level Fargo rated tournaments, I would likely play 2-4 tournaments a month.

Interesting. Thanks for taking the time for that response. 👍
 
We recently added a Fargo Rating time series graph in Digital Pool under each user profile. You can look up any player and under stats tab you can see their overall win/loss record, best tournament finish and their Fargo Rating History for the last 25 tournaments they played in. We plan to add a match history section as well to show all previous matches, scores and their opponent Fargo ratings during that event. We can also calculate relative Fargo performance ratings for single tournaments and will be doing a lot more with that also. We submit over 30,000 tournament matches to Fargo on avg. per month now so there's a lot we can do.

Check the stats tab under this example - https://digitalpool.com/users/aaron-rubin
Cool feature, doesn't seem to work on mine. Question for you guys. How come my Digital pool profile says I have just over 1300 Fargo games in system but I actually have over 1600+. Been like that for a bit.
 
Is that for all of their Fargo games or only the ones Digital Pool handles?
Only the games recorded on Digital Pool right now. We have limited access to the Fargo API to pull current player ratings and a few other things, but we can't pull player match history unfortunately.
 
In Digitalpool.com you have to edit your profile, then use the find FargoRate ID button.
Once you do, it will link your ID up and after that it auto updates your rating and Robustness.
 
In Digitalpool.com you have to edit your profile, then use the find FargoRate ID button.
Once you do, it will link your ID up and after that it auto updates your rating and Robustness.
yes, but what you see depends on what page you're viewing
Screenshot from 2022-12-13 12-46-18.png
Screenshot from 2022-12-13 12-46-00.png
 
Last edited:
yes, but what you see depends on what page you're viewing
There are two profiles.

A player profile, this is the one that the public sees and it auto updates once you have linked your FargoRate ID.
The URL will be like this:
https://digitalpool.com/players/your name

A user profile.
Only you can see that, as it has your email on it etc.
The URL will be like this:
https://digitalpool.com/users/your name
This one doesn't currently auto update.

Again, either way, if you haven't connected FargoRate you need to do it here:
Make sure you hit the SAVE Profile button once you have found yourself.
 
Back
Top