| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| shodbyed |
Posted - 10/02/2008 : 12:41:05 AM
i want to preface this by saying that i realize there is not much the apa can do about this and i love the apa handicap system (mostly) but it is sooooo frustrating to play new players with skill levels that are not yet "settled in". we played a new team with new players tonite. they were all very good additions to our league as far as im concerned. however, they were ranked so off that it was almost laughable. the one kid i played in 8 ball (my first time as a 7) was also ranked a 7. as good a shot as he was, he was no 7. probably a 4 or 5. to add to my point he's ranked a 3 in 9ball(we were playing double jeopardy). now i dont know how the ranking system works, probably a good thing its not common knowledge as it would lead to manipulation, but it should have some sort of check system on new players so as to not be unjust. i understand that things will "work themselves out" in the long run and so on and so forth but i dont think its fair for the mvp race (i got 2 or 3 extra undeserved points) or in the race to regionals. not to mention that i like a close match, i like a competition. i have much less fun when i slaughter someone or get slaughtered even though we are playing to our potential.
i dont know if changes are needed or if there are any solutions. i guess im just feeling a bit of frustration and need to vent but if anyone has any ideas to fix the problem or to cope, id like to hear them.
im not ready to be a 7 yet |
| 11 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Phil |
Posted - 10/13/2008 : 4:29:48 PM
quote:
[i]Originally posted by movistar[/i]
[br]I have talked to many people in the past few weeks that agree with me that the POINTS system is not fair to ALL.... so, here is my suggestion "AGAIN"... lets give a player ONE point for each MATCH won and the points will NOT have a bearing on who a person plays....very fair and EASY to score. I see nothing NEGATIVE about this way to determine the MVP !
keep the points system to determine the handicap but lose the scoring system to determine the MVP.
If a two plays a seven and wins, he gets as much credit (1) as a
Seven who plays a two and wins and gets (1) point, instead of 2 points versus 7 points. this would work BOTH in 9 ball and 8 ball.
here is an example of "unfairness".
A 2 ranking could play and win two matches over a 7 and an 8 and lose 6 matches to other players and end the season with 15 points.
another 2 ranking could play and win 7 matches over other two's and end up with 14 points and NOT be the MVP.
it seems to me that the player who won 7 matches is REALLY the better player and deserves the MVP.... under the current system , he is only second best.
have a great day and shoot well......thanks for reading
The points will NOT have a bearing on who a person plays??? I think that's a little naive. If MVP matters to a player such that (in today's system) it affects who they play, then it will absolutely affect who they play in whatever system is used. In your proposed system, the "MVP hounds" will always want the easiest match they can get. How does that NOT affect who they play?
Nothing NEGATIVE??? Here's the negative in your proposed system. A player can go 7 for 7 during the session, and will ALWAYS lose to someone who goes 8 for 13.
I've said it before - MVP is a subjective award and any selection method, whether objective (points) or subjective (voting) will have its flaws. There will be valid cases for someone other than the person selected, no matter what method is used. At least the current method gives the player an incentive to accept a bigger challenge most of the time.
Phil
|
| bikercowboy |
Posted - 10/13/2008 : 12:38:32 PM
A two who beats a 7 and an 8 is an MVP in my book. In the scenario you describe the 2 was not likely to be expected to win those 2 matches but neither was anybody else on the team, or at least that is my thinking when putting a 2 up against a more skilled player. I understand you frustration but think your logic assumes that better player should be MVP not the better player at their current skill level
should be MVP. The latter in my mind is more important in the long term for a number of reasons not the least of which is player retention. That 2 who makes MVP based on beating big numbers is likely to be around a while
Isn't the object to make the object ball? But yes you are right the leave would be awesome if it was your shot. |
| movistar |
Posted - 10/13/2008 : 11:07:31 AM
I have talked to many people in the past few weeks that agree with me that the POINTS system is not fair to ALL.... so, here is my suggestion "AGAIN"... lets give a player ONE point for each MATCH won and the points will NOT have a bearing on who a person plays....very fair and EASY to score. I see nothing NEGATIVE about this way to determine the MVP !
keep the points system to determine the handicap but lose the scoring system to determine the MVP.
If a two plays a seven and wins, he gets as much credit (1) as a
Seven who plays a two and wins and gets (1) point, instead of 2 points versus 7 points. this would work BOTH in 9 ball and 8 ball.
here is an example of "unfairness".
A 2 ranking could play and win two matches over a 7 and an 8 and lose 6 matches to other players and end the season with 15 points.
another 2 ranking could play and win 7 matches over other two's and end up with 14 points and NOT be the MVP.
it seems to me that the player who won 7 matches is REALLY the better player and deserves the MVP.... under the current system , he is only second best.
have a great day and shoot well......thanks for reading
|
| Keith |
Posted - 10/05/2008 : 11:38:23 PM
I find myself agreeing with phil on this and try not to count balls left on the table. When I lose I try to see how many turns it would have taken me and try to ajust my agressiveness from there. If I am overmatched I will leave balls in the way until I like my position. If I am going against a player that I think I can put in a daze I will try to run as many as possible not being worried about what they can do. And as far as the mvp points are concerned play me and we can call it even cas it will suck if the highest rating on their team is a 4 when we play them. I will try to talk my capt into letting me play you and then the winner will have the lead and the loser cant complain (probably me seeing as you have been playing well enough to go up to a 7). Hey if I dont get it on wednesday I have two other legit shots at mvp.
Confucios say "Man who dip in other man's well often get crabs." |
| Phil |
Posted - 10/05/2008 : 10:45:13 PM
Balls left on the table is an absolutely meaningless stat in 8-Ball. It doesn't even tell you how many balls the losing player made (were some of them on the break or made by the winning player?). It doesn't tell you how close the player was to winning (if I lose with seven balls on the table, I may have been just one turn away from running out, and if I lose with one ball on the table I may have needed three or four more turns). If I consistently lose with just a ball or two left, does that mean I'm pretty good, or does it mean I suck because I'm too dumb to leave some obstacles for my opponent when I can't get out? If I lose in five innings with two balls left, did I make one ball each time up, then miss, or did I run five in my first turn then spend the rest of the game taking low-percentage shots because that's all my opponent would leave me?
I've seen 8-Ball leagues that use balls left on the table as some measure of skill, and it's REALLY easy for a good player to sandbag in those leagues. It's not that hard to manipulate ball count in 8-Ball.
Phil
|
| Torsten |
Posted - 10/05/2008 : 4:21:47 PM
I don't disagree with you, Eddie, that margin of victory (i.e. balls remaining on the table in 8 ball) isn't some kind of indicator in a disparity of skill. There are two inherent flaws though. One, the information is only useful if whomever or whatever calculates the handicaps sees it. For example, take the following situation. You break and run all the way down to the black, then miss. I don't like what I have so I play a defense. I hook you. Now, one of several things is going to happen. Either a)you make a phenomenal shot to take the framem, leaving me with all my objects (sounds better than balls) on the table, and getting max margin of victory. b)you give me ball in hand, theoretically putting me in a position where I should finish, giving me the win in that frame by the slimmest margin. Or c) Somewhere between. I screw up eventually and leave you a makeable black with just a couple or three of my balls on the table. These scenarios cover the entire gauntlet of margins of victory over the course of only one inning.
Inherent flaw number two. Early 8 ball or scratch 8 ball. When somebody early 8 fouls with 4 balls left on the table, is that a bad loss? Or were those 4 balls "ducks" and would easily have been cleaned up? There are simply too many variables for the stat to be accurately useful in scoring.
Of course, it's gratifying when we play in practice and batter the hell out of each other and we get to say, "Hah! You still have 6 balls left!!!" But in reality, rather than helping the scoring system, I believe it would take our system, which is already pretty accurate, and open it up to flaws.
I think the worst time to have a heart attack would be during a game of charades... or during a game of fake heart attack. |
| shodbyed |
Posted - 10/04/2008 : 8:51:22 PM
hey torsten, how are ya? actually i disagree with what you said about that info being worthless. if you break run the balls down to the 8 and miss then i run out you would have done much better than if you ran say 3 balls in that same one inning. also if you broke and ran and i didnt get a chance at the table it wouldnt change the balls per inning ratio because you wouldnt have had an inning. as for the safety play it acts the same a defense is like a non inning i would suppose or a subtraction of an inning in your ratio. that ratio is the only way i can see to handicap someone im guessing that would be the main way they figure it. but i could be wrong. if ya think so let me know.
im not ready to be a 7 yet |
| Phil |
Posted - 10/02/2008 : 4:58:45 PM
My bad. I thought you were talking about another guy. Names are easy to mix up for new people...
Phil
|
| Torsten |
Posted - 10/02/2008 : 3:02:44 PM
They should try being on your team, Eddie.  We did it right last night. Shane was a 7 in eight ball and a 3 in nine on the scorecards. I just wanted to say, dead balls in 8 mean very little as margin of victory is completely irrelevant. Let's say you and I play a match, and you break and run. Leaves me with six dead on the table, give or take. But it's not reflective of how I played. I never saw the table. Even if we each had three balls left on the table, traded defensive shots for a few innings until one of us left an opening and the other ran out, it's still not indicative of how we played. Sure, it does provide Phil and Taz information on the losing player, but it's not info that you can really apply to anything.
The system is pretty accurate (you being a 7 notwithstanding!). Granted the dudes we played yesterday are a little all over the place, but they're new. Give it a few weeks. Hell, I lost my first match ever in APA and went straight to a 2. That kinda stuff just happens. So we got thumped last night. At least we got to enjoy Matty's charming company.
I think the worst time to have a heart attack would be during a game of charades... or during a game of fake heart attack. |
| shodbyed |
Posted - 10/02/2008 : 11:51:52 AM
well if i got it backwards then we screwed up big time last night because i beat him in 8ball as a 7 and matt lost in 9ball as a 3. neither were close. but the point is the discrepency between the 2. i dont think there are many "veteran" players that have more than a 1 point difference (aside from 7 & 9) maybe for the first couple of matches (if they play both) you could average them or keep them within a point or 2? i dont know.
i have another ? for u phil. why dont we count dead balls at the end of each 8 ball rack. it seems to me that would be a lot of extra information (on the losing player) that could be gathered easily. i believe it would add some more stability to the ranking system. in 9ball you know how many balls per inning a player averaged and that would give you the same info for 8ball.
but all and all i really like the way you and taz run the show and would like to thank you for doing your jobs so well. it must be hard to deal with a pain in the a#% like me!!
im not ready to be a 7 yet |
| Phil |
Posted - 10/02/2008 : 08:21:57 AM
You're right, Ed, there's not much that can be done. The guy is a 3 in 8-Ball and a 7 in 9-Ball (you got it backwards), but which one is right? If I hadn't been there last week I wouldn't know that he's probably going to end up as a 4 or 5 in both.
If you put in controls to keep players from going up too far too fast, you end up keeping some really good players down. If you keep them from going down too far too fast, you end up keeping some really bad players up.
With new players, the system is working with a very limited set of data, and it can only reflect the data it sees. The more matches a player plays, the more data the system has to work with, and the more accurate it becomes. An honest player will eventually arrive at the right number, and all you can do is give it time.
By the way Ed, he was only a 7 because of the excellent coaching he received last week...
Phil
|
|
|
