Your Player Rating Revealed..A, B, C, D...

M

Mr. J

Jeff Jimenez
Silver Member
Another new view for you to think about and digest. This is another simple way that I have devised to help in rating players. Maybe too simple, but very accurate for me. I have played in most all arenas of pool and/or seen most all of the corners that this game can take you to. Still, this is just an opinion and you can add or take away as you wish.

Once a Road Player came to town and asked me the speed of a certain potential customer. I simply stated that the player he was asking about was going to miss about 15 balls out of 100. I suppose if you run the numbers, this makes our player an 85% shooter...

The best and most honest way I have found to rate someone is to simply ask how many mistakes are they going to make. It may be a missed ball or bad safety or poor position or several other possibilities. Of the many, I have found that just asking how many out of 100 balls are they going to miss will give a very accurate reading of their speed.
This scale works with everyone on the planet included..

Please use the Word AVERAGE in your analysis here..

Also, You are only allowed to use this scale to rate someone who has played the game for a reasonble amout of time and has at least run a rack or two of 9-ball and 8-ball as well as possibly had a fair amount of one pocket or straight pool too..

A+++ 0-5 out of 100 missed...Efren, and the others who WIN world championships. True World Class...95% shooter and sometimes Never Misses!!!

A++ 0-10 missed... Pro tour players. 90% shooters.

A+ 0-15 missed... Tour players , Road Players..Champions Regional/National...85% shooters

A 0-20 missed... Very good Players... 80% shooters

B+ 0-25 missed.. Possibly your best league players and the ones who are always in the money... 75% shooters

B 0-30 missed...70% shooter

C+ 0-35 missed...65% shooter

C 0-40 missed ...60% shooter

D+ 0-45 missed...55% shooter

D Lots of misses...

Remember that all the above is just an Average calculation...An HONEST AVERAGE...

Thanks again,

Mr. J.
 
IMO, this is entirely too forgiving. Any Player who misses 1/5 - that's ONE out of every FIVE shots (80%) - could never be considered an "A" Player.

There are several other "Rating Systems" readily available that I feel would better represent a players true speed.

I respect that you put a lot of thought into this, and perhaps it works well for you and the players in your circle. But some player comes though here missing 20% of his shots, and we'll call him a C everyday. Not that there's anything wrong with that :D


JMO. ICBW.
-von
 
This looks sort of like the stats seen on espn , .924 etc..etc..stats would be next to players name. My question with this system is what is considered a missed shot? if my oppenent breaks and drops nothing and I have a difficult long rail cut on the 1 ball but one of those shots that you will always shoot at , maybe a 60% shot at best, is that a mis? what degree of difficulty results in a marked mis? or is it a missed ball that you are "supposed" to make 100% of the time.
 
Last edited:
VonRhett said:
IMO, this is entirely too forgiving. Any Player who misses 1/5 - that's ONE out of every FIVE shots (80%) - could never be considered an "A" Player.

There are several other "Rating Systems" readily available that I feel would better represent a players true speed.

I respect that you put a lot of thought into this, and perhaps it works well for you and the players in your circle. But some player comes though here missing 20% of his shots, and we'll call him a C everyday. Not that there's anything wrong with that :D


JMO. ICBW.
-von
Click to expand...
I believe what Mr. J is trying to say is that a local B player, while playing 9-ball or 10-ball, will make a mistake on average... one out of every five shots.

Mistakes include a variety of errors... missed balls, bad position play resulting in having to play safe instead of trying to pocket the ball, bad safeties resulting in selling out the next ball to opponent, missed kicks/jump shots resulting in BIH to opponent, and scratches on breaks (to name the most common).

He's probably not too far off... keeping in mind that if the B player breaks and scratches and then on his next turn at the table, he's hooked and doesn't make a legal hit, in order to average 80%, he has to make the next 8 balls in a row without one mistake.
 
selftaut said:
This looks sort of like the stats seen on espn , .924 etc..etc..stats would be next to players name. My question with this system is what is considered a missed shot? if my oppenent breaks and drops nothing and I have a difficult long rail cut on the 1 ball but one of those shots that you will always shoot at , maybe a 60% shot at best, is that a mis? what degree of difficulty results in a marked mis?
Click to expand...
From the accu-stats scoring system... if a player attempts to pocket a ball and fails to do so, it is considered an error... if the shot was easier than a spot shot, the missed shot counts as TWO errors.

Some of the higest accu-stats %s from this year's US Open were... 0.934, 0.891, 0.877, 0.874, 0.866, 0.853... and so on.

Mr. J's system is a bit more forgiving than that of Accu-stats... but it's not too far off.
 
cigardave said:
From the accu-stats scoring system... if a player attempts to pocket a ball and fails to do so, it is considered an error... if the shot was easier than a spot shot, the missed shot counts as TWO errors.

Some of the higest accu-stats %s from this year's US Open were... 0.934, 0.891, 0.877, 0.874, 0.866, 0.853... and so on.

Mr. J's system is a bit more forgiving than that of Accu-stats... but it's not too far off.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info on that cigar , I always wondered how they arrived at those numbers.
 
I like that rating system, I think the 100 shots would be the makeable variety Excluding Masse' and saftey play, whitch includes kicks.. Now if you kick and get out I think that would be extra credit...:D Bowliards would be a good game to figure a players speed. with a free break and 10 balls per rack 10 racks and your rated.

SPINDOKTOR
 
Ahhh - great point. A mistake is not necessarily a miss, and may not even end your turn.

That changes things.

-von
 
VonRhett said:
IMO, this is entirely too forgiving. Any Player who misses 1/5 - that's ONE out of every FIVE shots (80%) - could never be considered an "A" Player.

There are several other "Rating Systems" readily available that I feel would better represent a players true speed.

I respect that you put a lot of thought into this, and perhaps it works well for you and the players in your circle. But some player comes though here missing 20% of his shots, and we'll call him a C everyday. Not that there's anything wrong with that :D


JMO. ICBW.
-von
Click to expand...


Completely agree...There are some days where I miss 10 out of a 100 and I am definitely not playing at pro level even at that time
 
I gotta agree this is very very forgiving. I consider myself a solid D player (d+ if you will) and according to this I'm a B+ or A (LOL!!!). Definitely needs revision, but very good concept that I haven't seen before.
 
Assuming that all misses are due to random error unless the person has “learned” some specific techniques, the normal curve could be used to classify a player. The “curve” is used in college class rooms and many other areas of life where errors are thought to be due to chance or random error. I have rounded the percentage of error for ease of use.

A+ less than .1% error
A less than 2% error
B Less than 14% error
C Less than 64% error
D Less than 78% error

(The secret is revealed and you can see why students hate to be graded on the curve.)

100 shots are not needed for a reasonable estimate. To get an estimate with a repeatable level of accuracy, 30 attempts are needed. Watch some one play a few honest games and this will give a reasonable estimate of their usual shooting ability.

All things being equal, the next estimate of the shooter’s ability based on 30 shots will be within about 5% of the last estimate. That is, if the shooter’s error rate was 15% based on 30 shots his estimate should be between 10% and 20% the next time you rate him. (For those with a technical bent, I know this is not exact, but it is a reasonably useful tool.)

In a forgiving system 5% error could be used to assign an “A”

In a “clinical” situation a 14% error rate would suggest a significant ability. That is, the shooter is better than the “average” shooter.

This type of rating should exclude unusual shots that are not often seen in a pool match.
 
JoeW said:
Assuming that all misses are due to random error unless the person has “learned” some specific techniques, the normal curve could be used to classify a player. The “curve” is used in college class rooms and many other areas of life where errors are thought to be due to chance or random error. I have rounded the percentage of error for ease of use.

A+ less than .1% error
A less than 2% error
B Less than 14% error
C Less than 64% error
D Less than 78% error

(The secret is revealed and you can see why students hate to be graded on the curve.)

100 shots are not needed for a reasonable estimate. To get an estimate with a repeatable level of accuracy, 30 attempts are needed. Watch some one play a few honest games and this will give a reasonable estimate of their usual shooting ability.

All things being equal, the next estimate of the shooter’s ability based on 30 shots will be within about 5% of the last estimate. That is, if the shooter’s error rate was 15% based on 30 shots his estimate should be between 10% and 20% the next time you rate him. (For those with a technical bent, I know this is not exact, but it is a reasonably useful tool.)

In a forgiving system 5% error could be used to assign an “A”

In a “clinical” situation a 14% error rate would suggest a significant ability. That is, the shooter is better than the “average” shooter.

This type of rating should exclude unusual shots that are not often seen in a pool match.
Click to expand...


BUT you must consider how tight or loose the pockets are. A+ less than .1% error could become an A to B+ on a table thats not so forgiving, so IMHO you need to calculate the margin for error for the table a player would be rated on. Then there is table size, a B player on a 6' bar box is hardly going to be a B player on a 6x12 snooker table. So I believe to acurately measure ones performance you set a standard table size or the ranking. say, 4.5x9 4.5" pockets and 860 Simonis and put the player through a series of shots and situations to test them. Then based on that score you could acurately measure there performance for that day.

This is why Im buying the PAT book, to test my ability against Pro player's scores. If I do good im gonna braggggg, but IF I dont do so good Im not going to say a word... :p



SPINDOKTOR
 
I guess my main question about this system would be, what kind of shots are you talking about? Certainly these numbers do not accurately reflect straight pool, as missing 5 out of 100 shots equates to average runs of about 19. In an offense-only version of straight pool, this is not pro-level, or near it. To see it more clearly, look at the A++ player in the system - these players should only have average runs of about 9 according to these ratings.

So if you're not talking about 14.1-type shots, then what type of shot would you be talking about? It can't be difficult shots, because then the system goes from being too forgiving to being impossible to attain. I'm not sure I know what an "average" shot would be, then, if it's not the type of shots that usually present themselves in straight pool.

I'm not sure I buy the Accu-Stats interpretation of this system, as that system is just too complicated to use anecdotally. And presumably, the value of a system like this is to keep things simple. Calculating errors when there is no miss... not very simple.

The one thing I really like about this system is that pool players are habitually not completely honest about how they play. I think it's a lot easier for a person to hide his speed by saying he's a C, than for him to say he's a favorite to miss 40 balls out of 100. I think people's pride would make it more difficult for them to quantify just how bad they are pretending to play.

I'm serious about that last point; I think there is definitely a value in trying to create a more quantifiable rating system. I think it will lead to more honesty. In my opinion, this system needs a little work, but it might be a start.

- Steve
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, well even playing the 9 ball ghost, considering I rate myself a B player, If I play 11 racks (99 balls), I can miss or make a mistake about 3 times per game???!!! Even if there is a position error, by perhaps under or over shooting on speed, I can usually get back in line in the next shot and then proceed as if that blip never happened. In other words, a mistake may not affect the outcome (sell out) at all, so it shouldn't necessarily be counted.

I know that if I am MISSING 3 times per rack (once every 3 balls), man, I am going home!!!!
 
The one thing I hate about rating systems, is, for the most part its all about offense lol.

I've been doing the Q-skills test on a 9ft GC4, and have been averaging in the low 70's for points per 10 racks. My two lowest scores where 65 and 64 points on a 9ft Diamond.

Now when I add up all my points it has me listed as Semi-pro since I scored 687 points. But, I am the farthest thing from being a semi-pro lol.

Plus, the one thing a rating system doesnt account for is saftey play. Someone can be rated a B- player, but they break, run a few balls, play safe, get BIH, and run out the last 4 balls. Now you could say, well they are playing at a B+ level. But the reason they played safe, was of getting out of position for a shot they could have made.

So while they played a smart game, they are still only rated a B-
 
For personal handicaps or estimates of progress I like Olympic 9-Ball. Play 10 games. Break and begin with ball in hand following the break. The score for any single game is the number of balls made before a miss. (The 9 is just another ball in a combination shot.) A perfect score is 9. After ten racks have been played throw out the three worst games and the single best game. Divide the total number of balls made by 6 and you have the usual “best” average number of balls made in a 9-Ball match race to six.

Interesting thing about this method is that every “B” player I have talked to who tries it (always alone) scores an average of “9.” Now that is enough to make you wonder why they are “B” players. Most players won't admit they try it. If they do they do not report a meaningful average (which could be used for handicapping).

It seems to me that if you want to figure another's handicap you just have to watch them and use something like the Acustats calculations. I reviewed their system and find it to be quite useful. Scoring is not all that difficult. However, it does require two players of reasonably similar ability. Some additional calculation is needed to calculate the average length of runs to get a more accurate estimate given any two players of incomparable abilities.

Seems to me that a true sporting system in a club or a hall would be more on the order of a challenge ladder system where players are ranked based on win - loss records over some period of time. This type of system takes into consideration playing ability and defensive strategy used to "win."
 
Last edited:
With regard to the curve shown in my prior post, note that it is the average for a paticular game on a particular table. How well the average would generalize to other table sizes and games would have to be determined. I suspect that there would be some generality at the higher levels of play on standard tables.

Note the curve implies that the average professional or "A" players could be expected to miss about 3 times in a 14.1 race to 150 about 50% of the time.

In a 9- Ball race to 7 (63 balls) a pro could be expected to miss about 1 - 2 times per race. That seems about right to me. Of course it also implies that a "B" player could be expected to miss from 3 - 9 times in the same race to 7 so now you have an some idea about how well you play.

The problem here, or so I am told, is that in the major televised races the pocket widths are about 5.5 inches. If this is true, many more people would be classified as "pros" under these circumstances.
 
Last edited:
Testing yourself if you want to???

If you want to test your AVERAGE, there is a simple way...

Just rack up a rack of 10 ball and break and then take ball in hand and try to run out. If you miss, record the miss and then take ball in hand from there and continue to try to run out. Record all misses until you run out the rack. Do this with 10 racks and see how many misses you have recorded. Now if your really want to know for sure, you should call this a test session (10 racks of 10-ball) and do a minimun of 4 sessions. This will give you your TRUE ACCURATE HONEST AVERAGE for today. Perhaps you could do this testing once a month and see if you improve your statistics and rating???

Also, to keep things simple for you and keep in mind that we are ONLY CONCERNED WITH MISSED BALLS, after breaking the balls, untie any tied up balls and remove any random combination setups that have presented them selves immediately after the break. This is easily done by hand and requires just nudging some balls slightly from where they lie...

Remember, this is a simple test with simple guidelines...we are not concerned with bad position or other things...JUST MISSED BALLS...

Good Luck...

Mr. J.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top