Yes. Mezz West had him listed as Marcelo Rojas, but I confirmed with Oscar he is Enrique Rojas, Chile
World Fargo Rating list --place changes from the US Open
- Thread starter mikepage
- Start date
Yes. Mezz West had him listed as Marcelo Rojas, but I confirmed with Oscar he is Enrique Rojas, Chile
The system has an arbitrary baseline, so where the baseline is set determines the current maximum rating. What is important in the system is the difference between two players. The current highest rating for an established player is 837.
If someone came along who beat the top 10 players in the world by a typical score of 12-3 in a race to 12, he would be rated at about 1000, or 200 points above the current best players. I think we are not likely to see that level of play. In an alternate-break format it is probably impossible.
As for the arbitrary baseline, it is possible for a player to have a negative rating. A system similar to FargoRate (NPL) is used around here and there was one player who had a lot of trouble hitting the end rail. His actual rating should have been negative, but he was set at the Fargo equivalent of about 30. I think the baseline should be set so that a negative rating is impossible for an established player. In a quick scan of some FargoRate numbers, the lowest established player I saw was 167. I figure that would be a negative rating (about -25) in the NPL system.
For reference, if a FargoRate 200 played SVB a race to 100, the theoretically expected outcome would be 100-2 or so, but those matches don't happen in practice.
Last edited:
Just a question, if a league player plays 50 games during League season, and only loses 2 games out of them 50 played....what would the Fargo rating be for that player?
I don't know they have a Fargo rate ,, but it was top player and 125 dollars for me doing that exact thing
1
My problem is this, in Golf playing 72 holes, there's golfers that can post under par scores, and golfers that the only way they can get an under par score is if they wrote it down on a piece of paper. On that basis, if 10,000 golfers played the same 72 holes, and only for example purposes....only 64 players were able to post under par scores....would it be fair to say, THOSE 64 golfers who posted the under par scores are the best 64 golfers in the world....at that moment?
In Bowling, if 10,000 bowlers bowled 10 games each and was allowed to throw out the 5 worst game scores and pick the 5 best scores to keep, and only 64 bowlers posted a total pin count of 1490-1500, with 1500 being 5 games with a perfect score of 300 each....would it be fair to say....THOSE 64 bowlers at that moment.....are the best bowlers on the planet?
If in ANY sport of skill, there IS a way of identifying the top 64 at ANY thing, world wide....is it NOT a safe assumption that you have with confidence....identified the best of the best? I'm NOT talking about ones ability to perform under pressure against some one else, I'm just talking about the ability to perform a specific task better than anyone else in the world as to identify the top 64 in the world at a specific task.
In Bowling, if 10,000 bowlers bowled 10 games each and was allowed to throw out the 5 worst game scores and pick the 5 best scores to keep, and only 64 bowlers posted a total pin count of 1490-1500, with 1500 being 5 games with a perfect score of 300 each....would it be fair to say....THOSE 64 bowlers at that moment.....are the best bowlers on the planet?
If in ANY sport of skill, there IS a way of identifying the top 64 at ANY thing, world wide....is it NOT a safe assumption that you have with confidence....identified the best of the best? I'm NOT talking about ones ability to perform under pressure against some one else, I'm just talking about the ability to perform a specific task better than anyone else in the world as to identify the top 64 in the world at a specific task.
Glen --- There is a big whole lot of --IT DEPENDS.
First, if that is all the person played, the player wouldn't have a Fargo Rating at all because a Fargo Rating requires a minimum of 200 games.
But let's say (1) these are the only games the player has in the system, and (2) the player maintained this level of performance for 200 games (i.e., had a record of 192 wins, 8 losses) AND his or her league opponents had established ratings.
Then this player would be about 450 points above the competition level.
The highest rated league player locally is Rory Hendrickson (second at US Open 8-Ball this year and rated 732). Rory plays in a league where the average opponent is rated about 500, which is actually a pretty strong league. Rory maintains 80-85% win percentage. Interestingly, Rory's rating of 730ish could be calculated JUST from his play in pro-level tournaments OR JUST from his league play.
Of course we have tens of thousands of league players in the system, and nobody whose games are dominated by league play is anywhere near this level. That is, all of the high-rated players who do play league have many more games from other sources.
You may or may not have seen the attached description of the interesting experiment we did last year analyzing SVBs games.
Attachments
Then on another note Mike, is it possible for a player to sandbag their Fargo rating to a lower rating? For the purpose of entering a tournaments at a lower rating?
Last edited:
Yes, it is.
In practice the concern is a situation where a player sees a big benefit by dropping just a few points. And this is the reason we recommend against having, say, a major, national "600 and under" tournament or something like that.
More broadly, it is a low concern. We have actually been tracking this sort of thing form many years. And when we emerge in a new area, there are several of the any-system-can-be-gamed crowd that start chirping. But then reality sets in. And here are some of the realities.
(1) games from many different sources contribute, so it is not like you can dump in your Tuesday night UPU league and keep your UPU rating down. You've got the weekly tournaments and the monthly tournaments, and national tournaments, and so on contributing to the same rating.
(2) If you choose to pay for and enter a tournament for the purpose of dumping, you get disappointed because you play very few games in your two dumped matches. You have to dump four tournaments convincingly --paying the entry and spending the day each time--just to counterbalance one tournament where you don't dump and play 8 matches.
(3) the number of games in an entire year of league is similar to the number of games you might play in one larger tournament.
The reality--and we've seen it over and over and over again--is that once people believe in the system generally (and there is plenty good reason to believe in it) PLAYERS WANT A HIGHER RATING. And this includes players that in the past were always angling to get into a lower division or to be categorized as B rather than A...
I've been contacted probably a hundred times by players--good players, shortstop level, pro level, who are wondering if a certain tournament is in or certain matches are in. Not once has it been the case that it is a tournament they did poorly in. This is telling.
We can of course have statistical signatures looking for "unlikely fluctuations,"
but so far this had told us only things like we inadvertently assigned, for example pro player Mike Davis's matches to some other league player Mike Davis--i.e, an error...or a match got keyed in as 44 to 3 rather than 4 to 3...
If it wasn't an error, I'm pretty sure I'd be the guy losing 44-3.
I woulda forfeited long before that - I CANNOT watch that stroke of his, would drive me insane.
Mikepage. Could you please clear some PMs? Box is full. I have some questions about the fairmatch site and logging in.
It's designed to basically be above the rating of the 48 defeated players and below the ratings of the 2 players who won. In other words, it reflects the strength of the competition. Without knowing that strength, your question cannot be answered.
OK then, one more senerio. A player that is definitely one of the top players in the world, but only let say plays in two tournaments a year....how accurate will the Fargo ratings be without much history of this person playing except for the 2 tournaments a year he plays in?
Mike, what about this?
I suspect you and everybody else more or less knows the answer to this. Ratings are more reliable when they are based on more data.
Take Konrad Juszczyszyn, for example, a very good player from Poland. He walked undefeated through the Gotham City Classic beating Kevin Cheng twice, Dechaine, Boyes, Orcollo, etc. And many people got their first glimpse of him here. It is easy to conclude he might be a tippy-top world-class player emerging on the scene. But we know from lots more data that he's a solid player who had an unusually good tournament--more like Billy Thorpe, Amar Kang, or Josh Roberts and not so much like Bergman or Dechaine.
Attachments
I read that in another thread, and I didn't quite understand it.
So whats your angle here Glenn?
You seem genuinely interested in Fargorate, does this have something to do with your thoughts on a "pro" tour? Just interested in your thoughts, seriously:thumbup:
I think Fargo is the future for all pool. Hope they realize what they have here and use it.
Jason
My thoughts are that the Fargo rating system might be a way of gaining some insight to better match up betting with players matching up, but I don't believe it's the go to system to determine who the best players in the world are for a best of the best only type of tournament. I can see Fargo ratings changing, fluctuations caused by playing on different tables for example. A table with 4" corner pockets are going to produce more misses and different win/loss scores vs a table with 5" corner pockets. Does it work to rate players playing 14.1....I don't see how it would, so players being rated in a 14.1 tournament would be rated on their 9/10/8 ball ratings, in which are completely different games than 14.1 so how is a tournament with only the top 64 players in the world suppose to decide who is qualified to olay and who is not? My system does that, but it won't match up players to decide who to bet on.
Well just recentlu8had the world 14.1 championship....what role did the Fargo ratings play in that event, and how were the players qualified to play in the event pryor to the tournament?
Mike could answer that, but I don't believe it takes 14.1 or 1 pckt, banks etc into consideration.
I could be wrong.
Jason