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: