| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
poolguy
USA
54 Posts |
 Posted - 06/05/2008 : 9:54:31 PM
|
I'm not sure the APA can or will do anything about what I've noticed to be a severe deficiency in scoring, but let me put it out for discussion. The deficiency I'm talking about dramatically affects handicaps. Or, more accurately, the last of this information can cause a player's handicap to be grossly inaccurate.
We've got a player on our team who in the past was simply a bar player. He knew how to make a ball, but didn't know how to get shape, didn't know anything about patterns, and didn't know anything at all about defense.
His record now is, I think, 3 wins and 5 losses. One of those wins wsas against a 7 (he was a 4 at the time). The 7 won the lag, broke, made a ball, and should have run out. He missed a ball at about the 5th or 6th shot. Our player didn't have any problems and ran 7 balls and missed the 8 ball. The cue ball just happened to get behind the opponent's ball and the 7 took a chance and kicked at a ball near the side pocket. He scratched, and our player had ball in hand on the 8 ball. He obviously won that game. He then broke and made the 8-ball on the break. Game, set, and match.
The statistics do not show that he got ball in hand on the 8-ball. Without that information, the handicap system quickly moved him up to a '5', and he's been there ever since. If you take that game away, his record would be 2 wins and 5 losses, and he'd either be a '4' or a '3'.
To me, the scoring should keep track of balls in hand (shooter error), balls in hand which are the result of defense (highly skilled defensive shot by opponent), and balls in hand when shooting the 8-ball (could be either of the above). All of these situations (at least to me) directly affect the skill level of the players. But the system doesn't capture this information.
Comments?
John
It only hurts if you miss. |
|
|
Kerry Randolph
USA
172 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2008 : 08:24:37 AM
|
I had this same conversation with one of my players when my 3 was given ball in hand 8 or 9 times in 2 games. The other player could not stop scratching. It gave my 3 an easy win. On the score sheet it looked like my player played great when in fact the games were basically given to her. I agree there should be a place for how many ball in hands a player gets throughout a match. It can really make a difference in how a player wins a game.
The problem with this is do we start marking when a player plays really bad, or when they make shots but hook themselves and have to kick at balls, or when they miss and leave their opponent a perfect shot, how about when someone is really lucky and has the roll going their way. We all have had these nights or played someone that had a night like this. It can make for a really lopsided match. I lost badly to a 3 in 9-ball because I could not make a shot to save my life and he could not miss. Should we have a box marked PYC (played like crap) and one marked OF (on fire)? The list of things that affect the handicap can go on and on. There has to be a line draw somewhere.
It is better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than to open it and remove all doubt |
Edited by - Kerry Randolph on 06/06/2008 08:27:18 AM |
 |
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2008 : 09:56:32 AM
|
While we're telling stories, let me share one with everyone. This story is about a player who starts APA on a 9-Ball team. After winning his first five matches, he goes up to a 5. He then loses three matches in a row and goes back down to a 4, after which he wins two out of three matches.
This player then joins an 8-Ball team. Since he has 11 9-Ball scores, he starts 8-Ball with his 9-Ball skill level, a strong 4 (7 out of 11 in 9-Ball, 7 out of 8 as a 4 in 9-Ball). He then wins one of four matches, with two of the losses being close hill-hill matches. In his fifth 8-Ball match, he plays a 7 and nearly runs out the first rack, missing only the 8-Ball. The 7 scratches on his next turn, giving him ball in hand on the 8. He sinks it, then makes the 8 on the break to win the match in 2 innings.
Because this player started 8-Ball as a strong 4, this match is enough to push him to a 5. The next week, he plays another solid 5 and wins convincingly, 4-1. The following week he loses to a 5 in the playoffs.
Going into this session the player is 1-1 as a skill level 5. In week 1 he plays the same 7 he played before, and quickly gets up 2-1 in the match. If he was still a 4, the match would be over and he would have beaten the same 7 twice by scores of 2-0 and 2-1. He ends up losing the match 5-2.
Teammates of this player contend that he should be a 4 or even a 3 because he's only three out of 8 and was helped in his first match against the 7 by an ill-timed scratch. I would be willing to bet that in each of his three hill-hill losses, he made an unforced error at some point and gave up ball-in-hand at least once, but that is not mentioned by his teammates. According to them, only the one that went his way should count.
Luck tends to even out over time. If there were no luck, some wins would be losses and some losses would be wins. Nobody can say for sure what would happen to skill levels if we start trying to record luck. But if you want to start recording ball-in-hand given up and received (and the reasons for them), you should also include slop shots and unintentional safeties, because that's the next thing you'll be pointing to when you complain about the handicap system (yes, a post that starts with "I'm not sure the APA can or will do anything about what I've noticed to be a severe deficiency in scoring" is a complaint). Put all of that stuff on the scoresheet and nobody will want to keep score. Imagine having to do that in 9-Ball, where it's hard enough to keep score already!
I've seen leagues that try to track everything, including balls left on the table and balls made on the break. A big reason people give for not playing in those leagues is that the scorekeeping is too tedious. For a perfectionist who believes all of that stuff makes a big difference, it's the only way to go. But for the average recreational player, it is too much work when all they want to do is go out and have fun with their friends.
Phil
|
|
|
|
poolguy
USA
54 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2008 : 04:48:39 AM
|
Phil,
You're muddling up my point. I'm not talking about keeping track of slop. All I'm saying is that balls in hand, and the reasons for them, would dramatically affect the way handicaps are calculated. Or, they should. I don't know the APA algorithm for handicaps because it is "trade secret".
Our player won the first game in 1 inning, and the second in 0 innings. The 7 got spanked if you don't know the underlying reasons. His handicap rating will probably not go down for a very long time, because this spanking is probably given lots more weight than if he were to lose to a 3 without ever taking a shot.
Are there other issues I have with the handicap/scoring system? You bet. But they aren't worth even mentioning because of the deaf ears that they would fall on.
John
It only hurts if you miss. |
|
|
|
Taz
USA
555 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2008 : 07:41:27 AM
|
John, you seem to have many "issues" with APA and its system. My PERSONAL opinion is if you can find a handicap league that you feel has a better handicapping system, you should join it.
No "perfect" handicapping exist, but those of us who run APA leagues believe we have the best system for handicapping amateur play there is. It is what it is. Take it or leave it. |
|
|
|
BigRigTom
USA
102 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2008 : 09:21:19 AM
|
Sorry John but I agree with Phil and Taz.
There will always be a certain set of things we feel could be better but often when you look at the big picture and consider the overall intent of the APA and it's members the system is pretty darn good.
The rules have to be some where between very hard line and very loose because of the games which are played and the people who play the games.
As they get more and more serious some players may out grow the APA but it seems to me that the more I learn about the game as a whole the more I agree with the way the APA is structured and the rules seem to make a lot more sense to me. I keep score s lot on the teams I play with and I think the score keeping is already good if it is done correctly.
There will always be those odd situations like you described but that will be true no matter what the rules are. To be properly handicapped a player just has to play a lot of matches and the handicap will level out over time if the handicap system is well defined and administered properly using properly completed score sheets.
BigRigTom
http://hardingersystems.com/BAT-Forum to discuss Billiards and Trucking or anything that interest you! |
|
|
|
poolguy
USA
54 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2008 : 10:15:17 PM
|
Phil, Taz,
OK. Phil thinks luck evens out and this isn't a problem. Taz would like me to play elsewhere.
The problem with this situation (lack of keeping track of BIH and the reasons) is that handicaps are skewed, both ways. And luck doesn't even out in the case I described ... it will take many, many matches for our player to go back to a '4', where he should be.
If a player scratches or fouls, due to their own mistake, this gives the other player a tremendous advantage. Let me give you a case in point. Early on in my current APA career (which for the SouthCoast is only about 14 matches or so), when I was very erratic, I was moved down to a '3'. I played another 3 and broke the first game, didn't make a ball, and on his turn he scratched. I ran out because I could take the problem ball off the table on the first shot. I broke again, didn't make anything, and he *again* scratched on his first shot. I ran out again for the same reason ... I could solve the problem with BIH. That team probably complained to you about how good I was ... or one of their players was on the handicap advisory committee and voted on an action I'll take about later.
The other situation is a player who absolutely locks up his/her opponent with a safety, forcing them to kick at a ball that cannot be hit, and they foul. This situation *should* be recorded so that the defensive shot is given lots more weight. As it stands now, if I have to do a 3 rail kick to simply make a legal shot I'm penalized with a defensive shot (I'm not trying to make the ball) when I really simply made *an amazingly difficult offensive* shot. So, I make a difficult shot and get a defensive shot marked, or lock up the opponent to get BIH and get a defensive shot marked. No difference in scoring and no difference in handicap as a result.
It would be very simple to add this to the scoring, and the results would be much more accurate.
If a player plays poorly, this shows up in the number of innings. We don't need to keep track of "played like crap".
The other item which really boils my blood is that the handicap advisory committee deemed me to be a level '6' player while the handicap system had me at a high 5. I've never sandbagged ... I'm simply a player who is 64, who is 100 pounds overweight, who is diabetic and was seriously out of control sugar-wise, and playing inconsistently. The singles regional was the last APA pool I played before leaving on an extended trip and in that tournament I lost to a '5' (probably the highest seed in the tournament), beat a '5', and lost to a '4' who I should normally smoke. Six weeks later I got the letter about the handicap change. If the APA handicap system is so good, why was I moved up *arbitrarily*? Why not let the system move me up ... as it did when I smoked a '6' at the Southwest Challenge ... the week before the arbitrary moving of my handicap was to take place. I beat him 4 to 0, but the innings were pretty high. He played like a '4', and an average one. He "played like crap" and the innings show it. But the system moved me just like it moved my teammate because of the match results. I would bet the farm that if that match were thrown out, and tha handicap advisory committee's ruling that I be a '6' were recinded, that the "system" would rate me a '5' (but a high one).
Due to my higher handicap (which I actually may deserve now that my sugar is under control and I'm more consistent) I cannot play as a regular on my team. The only reason I'm still playing is that I am on a team which has team members who I like and the other '6', who is much better than me, has said he'd like to split weeks.
I said in another post to this thread that I wouldn't discuss other handicap issues because of deaf ears. The fact that I was moved I wasn't going to talk about because the APA has a big hammer and I'm a simple nail. Nothing would be done. But to say that the handicap system is quite, quite, good and at the same time arbitrarily move a player up ... overriding the handicap system ... is talking out of both sides of the mouth.
I won't be bothering anybody with any more topics. I will probably not even play APA after the summer. I'm *not* competitive with 6 level players and this takes away any incentive to try to play at Nationals in singles. And it also basically makes me a liability for a team ... unless I start a new one, which I am definitely not going to do. I might get lucky and win a regional but I'd be 2 and out at Nationals.
John
It only hurts if you miss. |
|
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2008 : 01:42:56 AM
|
John,
Actually, what Taz said is if you can find a league with a better handicap system, you should join it. That applies to everyone, not just you. But for the record, Phil thinks you should play elsewhere, whether you find a league with a better handicap system or not. That applies to just you, and nobody else. You're out of line.
There's nothing wrong with a healthy debate. As you and everyone else know, I am perfectly willing to discuss issues in this forum and others. It can be both entertaining and educational at the same time. But personal attacks will not be tolerated. In this thread alone, there are at least three instances where you sling personal insults at us. That is unacceptable.
You really should refrain from speaking of matters about which you choose to be ignorant. A Handicap Advisory Committee is PART OF the Equalizer system, not something put in place to make up for deficiencies. Besides being addressed in the Team Manual, there are two pages in every Team Packet that explain the Handicap Advisory Committee. Perhaps you should read them.
In this thread where you bash the handicap system, you have used exactly two examples to attempt to make your point. The first was a guy who went from almost a 5 to barely a 5 after beating a 7 in one inning. The other was yourself. We discussed this privately and I was going to leave it at that, but since it boils your blood to the point that you had to bring it up in this public forum, I guess I have no choice but to respond here in front of God and everyone, to demonstrate how you selectively tell parts of the story to make a ludicrous claim seem reasonable.
Everyone, this is the story of John. John was playing as a 5 during Spring Session, when the HAC recommended that he be raised to a 6. After reviewing his record, I decided to follow that recommendation. John got a letter (like several other players did) informing him of this decision. The letter stated that John's new skill level would go into effect the following week. The night he received the letter, John played another 5 and won 4-1. John went up to a 6 ON HIS OWN in the computer system following that match. In addition, John played in the Southwest Challenge that weekend, where the computer system made him a 6 after he won his first match. Two different computers, two different matches, and John went up ON HIS OWN both times. So John, you tell me, was the HAC wrong? Strike one.
The HAC, just like the computer formula, attempts to assess a player's ability, not his/her average performance. I explained that to John in our private discussion. Neither the system nor the HAC will make you a 6 until you demonstrate the ability of a 6. John says he may deserve to be a 6 now that his blood sugar is under control and he's more consistent. That's average performance, not ability. John, you've always had the ability of a 6. Both the computer system (twice) and the HAC recognized it. Strike two.
Two strikes, now for the curve ball. John, I never had to lock your skill level at a 6. You went up on your own, and have maintained that rating ever since, ON YOUR OWN. Had you at any point been about to go back down, I would not have allowed it, but so far that hasn't been necessary. And the match from the Southwest Challenge isn't even in the system, so I guess I now own your farm.
Strike three, you're out. I have locked your user Id so you can no longer post on this message board. If you create a new Id and post again, I will delete the post and lock that Id as well.
Phil
|
|
|
|
TCIndepMo
USA
12 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2008 : 02:47:15 AM
|
Some FULL DISCLOSURE first. I have been an APA league operator for 28 years. This doesn’t mean I never make a mistake, only that I have some experience with various LO responsibilities like monitoring player skill levels, etc. Phil allows me to peruse this board and grants me the courtesy to post occasionally, which I appreciate.
More FULL DISCLOSURE. I too am a diabetic (type II) that has to deal with sugar issues and I know how that can affect my concentration and pool shooting, etc. I am not overweigh but I too am north of 60 years old. And YES - the blood sugar can really be a problem to deal with at times. I agree that having it “under control or not” can have an effect on your pool shooting. Of course, for all we know on any given night your opponent might also be dealing with health (physical or emotional) issues also. Intangibles often even out whether we know it or not.
John, as for your issues - you ended your first post asking for “comments?” So…
Many players can go on all night about “the new 3 that plays like a 7” and “I only won 2 weeks in a row and the LO raised me” and “I’ve lost 5 weeks in a row and the LO won’t lower me”, etc. These player comments started 28 years ago in Kansas City. The APA skill level system is designed to rank players so that the SEVEN’s as a group, are a little bit better than the SIX’s; and the SIX’s as a group are a little bit better then the FIVE’s; the FIVE’s a bit better than the FOUR’s, etc. Occasionally all HONEST players will have nights where they play much better OR MUCH WORSE than their current level. The mathematics of the APA system allow for these nights so that a few minutes “snap shot” of pool playing does not out weigh your overall trend of play. The matches are not played under laboratory conditions where every nuance of every situation and every shot selection and execution can be pondered to the extreme. It is a fun league where you can take it as seriously as WW III if you want. As long as you go by the rules, etc.
I think some players go a bit overboard in their analysis of what they see happen on the pool table and how this correlates with the skill level numbers they see on the scoresheet. To conclude that there is a “severe deficiency in scoring” is not surprising, but not realistic either, IMO. Some teams/captains/scorekeepers won’t even record the safeties - to hope they would record specifics as to BIH circumstances and other details is not realistic. It is not going to happen! The info will never make it to the scoresheet. And that is assuming both scorekeepers would agree in the first place on such specifics as luck, slop, facial expressions, body language, attitude, vocal inflection, etc. All of these factors have been cited to me as PROOF that the opponent was rated incorrectly. Yet, who hasn’t had a night where the pool god smiled on us and everything went in, etc? If you are playing the game at 64, I suspect you have had a few of these nights, as have I.
You cite an APA career of “about 14 matches or so” which makes it very easy for your skill level to appear erratic. The fewer nights of play the easier it is for you to move your skill level. You then describe playing a match as a THREE where you won two games (if I understand your words) in two innings! Yes, your opponent scratched twice but apparently you possessed the skill to take advantage of this gift and you clobbered him. Like you are supposed to! I salute you for not dogging it to pad your innings. Of course your skill level went up. What did you expect? I can not tell from this many miles away but I doubt any LO or HAC would put you at level SIX after only 14 scores unless they thought that number was most fair to you and to your opponents. Your comments like “I smoked a 6 at the Southwest challenge” tells us you can shoot when the blood sugar is where it belongs, right? As for “being penalized with a defensive shot” - not true. Your skill level is based on misses when you are trying to sink a ball, among other things. It says so in the rule book. If you shoot a defensive shot and it is marked - that is not a penalty. It is your scorekeeper going by the rules.
Nobody gets to claim “but he gave me BIH so I had to win” all the time. As for “why was I moved up arbitarily (sic)” I move players up in Kansas City after reviews every time I think it is warranted. Just because you are unhappy about the move or do not understand the explanation does not mean it was arbitrary. Many APA areas have similar committees that advise the LOs (who can only be in one bar at a time) on the “true speed” of new players, etc. The LO does not personally benefit from any player going up or down - the point is for the REST OF THE PLAYERS IN TOWN to be able to compete fairly versus that opponent each week. If a committee of local players think they should advise the LO that you are a SIX - guess what? But I doubt if that number is etched in stone. Especially after only 14 nights.
Not trying to pick a fight with anyone. Gee, that never happens. (Right, Phil?) I just thought a point of view from another LO might be of interest.
TomCampbell
APA Independence Missouri |
Edited by - TCIndepMo on 06/13/2008 1:27:40 PM |
|
|
|
Rick
65 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2008 : 12:48:01 PM
|
| 2 years ago I was playing my best pool ever , and I stayed as a 5 for two seasons . This year I'm playing moderatly to bad but beat my opponents because more often than not they screw up , now I'm a 6 . I like being a 6 , I like putting the fear of God into my opponents so that they put up a 3 that then kicks my arse . I love the challange and the game even when I'm playing badly . I also play BCA where there is no handicap system and love the fact I might play someone who's crap and still lose , or play a fantastic player and maybe I'll win . The fact is it's a bunch of round balls on the table and anything can happen , I think the handicapping system is a tremendous way for players to start the game , and as you get better you'll always find something that doesn't quite work ,so go play BCA , a pro league , whatever makes you happy , but the game neeeds to be kept simple for those players coming into it . |
|
|
|
movistar
193 Posts |
Posted - 06/13/2008 : 9:28:51 PM
|
I am NOT taking sides for any of these parties......BUT I am NOT sure if John has been "kicked out" of the league.... , if he has,it was NOT for doing anything "ILLEGAL or IMMORAL" but, for using his right as an american citizen to express his beliefs...right or wrong....has this become a communist country without my knowledge?
please update... is john IN or OUT?
thanks |
|
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 06/14/2008 : 07:26:07 AM
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by movistar[/i]
[br]I am NOT taking sides for any of these parties......BUT I am NOT sure if John has been "kicked out" of the league.... , if he has,it was NOT for doing anything "ILLEGAL or IMMORAL" but, for using his right as an american citizen to express his beliefs...right or wrong....has this become a communist country without my knowledge?
please update... is john IN or OUT?
thanks
John has not been kicked out of the league. His posting priveleges have been revoked on this message board. Soooooooooooooo many people mistakenly believe that our right to free speech means freedom from consequence. It does not - it means freedom from prosecution by the government. So, unless John ends up in jail for expressing his beliefs, I wouldn't be so quick with the communist references.
John is free to express is beliefs in any medium available to him. This medium is no longer available to him.
Phil
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Scoring Problems Related to Handicaps
