| Author |
 Topic  |
|
D-RACK
USA
321 Posts |
 Posted - 04/16/2009 : 3:53:23 PM
|
OK hole in the point system
Last week 3rd place is playing last place...last place forfeits the night 15 point to the other team.... for what ... buying that captain drinks... LOL ....i mean if u win u get one u lose u get 0 .....
Really .....
Y not make it worth 100 points a win...lol |
 |
|
|
BigRigTom
USA
102 Posts |
Posted - 04/16/2009 : 5:23:22 PM
|
If it works for 8 ball why do we count the balls and reward 2 points for sinking the 9.
Why not just make it win or lose on the 9 just like it is win or lose on the 8?
If it makes sense in 9 ball why does it NOT make sense in 8 ball?
BigRigTom
http://hardingersystems.com/BAT-Forum to discuss Billiards and Trucking or anything that interest you! |
|
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 04/16/2009 : 5:49:46 PM
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by BigRigTom[/i]
[br]If it works for 8 ball why do we count the balls and reward 2 points for sinking the 9.
Why not just make it win or lose on the 9 just like it is win or lose on the 8?
If it makes sense in 9 ball why does it NOT make sense in 8 ball?
BigRigTom
http://hardingersystems.com/BAT-Forum to discuss Billiards and Trucking or anything that interest you!
Short answer to just this question - in 9-Ball an early 9 wins the game, making it impossible to HANDICAP 9-Ball based on games won.
If you walk into a pool hall and watch players match up, the better player will often give the weaker player some "weight". In 9-Ball, the weight is NEVER games on the wire, but in 8-Ball it is ALWAYS games on the wire. That's because of the early 9 scenario. The weight in 9-Ball is usually some partial completion of the rack (8-Ball, last three, etc.). This lends itself to the ball count scoring system we use for 9-Ball.
Phil
|
|
|
|
Keith
USA
242 Posts |
Posted - 04/17/2009 : 02:41:01 AM
|
D-RACK come on. Read the post before you comment. If the whole night is forfeited then the split would be 10 for the winning side and 0 for the losing side.
If a team won 4 to 1 playing all matches that week then they would get 13 points under that system.
If a team won 3 to 2 playing all matches that week then they would get 11 points under that system.
That would make it better to play and win 3 matches than to accept all 5 in a forfeit of the entire week.
Hey I was just told that we are supposed to make the balls in the pockets. That makes a big difference. |
|
|
|
Keith
USA
242 Posts |
Posted - 04/17/2009 : 02:48:11 AM
|
Phil
I would like to know what you think of this 8 ball scoring system. It seems that it could work. If you agree then what would we have to do to change over to that system?
As follows for each match
play and win = 3 points
win by forfeit = 2 points
play and lose = 1 point
lose by forfeit = 0 points
Max of 15 points each night and lets say 10 to 12 points for a byes.
Hey I was just told that we are supposed to make the balls in the pockets. That makes a big difference. |
|
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 04/17/2009 : 09:06:09 AM
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by Keith[/i]
[br]Phil
I would like to know what you think of this 8 ball scoring system. It seems that it could work. If you agree then what would we have to do to change over to that system?
As follows for each match
play and win = 3 points
win by forfeit = 2 points
play and lose = 1 point
lose by forfeit = 0 points
Max of 15 points each night and lets say 10 to 12 points for a byes.
Hey I was just told that we are supposed to make the balls in the pockets. That makes a big difference.
Let's see, all of my players are there, ready to play, some of them having paid for a sitter and/or dinner, and the other team doesn't show. How is that our fault, and why should we be shorted on the points?
Better yet, say your team is 6 points out of first place going into the final week. The captain of the first-place team contacts your opponent and convinces them not to show up. You get 10 points, but the first-place team gets 5 just for showing up to their match, so you can't catch them. They end up one point ahead of you. Would you be happy with that?
Phil
|
|
|
|
D-RACK
USA
321 Posts |
Posted - 04/17/2009 : 09:22:39 AM
|
Thank You Phil!!!! Thats what i was trying to say....
KNOW RESPOND!!!!
LOL!!!
D-RACK |
|
|
|
Nathaniel
USA
25 Posts |
Posted - 04/17/2009 : 11:27:22 AM
|
Keith, I have an idea... why don't you stop try'n to be the website admin. Lol, you don't seem to have much to do other than respond to everyone's post as if they’re addressed to you buddy . Plus Torsten had (like normal) a very well thought out response. You should have read his response to your suggestion.
“On Forfeits: Interesting idea, Keith. Not practical, but interesting. There are already things in place to encourage teams not to forfeit. For example, AUTOMATICALLY LOSING!!! If you need to offer teams incentive to actually show up, that's the sign of a problem far bigger than the scoring system.”
Also:
You asked in a previous post if I was offended by your opinion that Torsten would beat me. The answer is no. I never have a problem getting beat, it’s when I lose that ticks me off. As a matter of fact I pretty much travel all over to find someone who can beat me. It is what I love about the game, my best against yours …. As for my opinion of you, if you’re who I’m thinking you are (the guy who fell off your chair at PJ’s, and my friend Travis helped you up). I’m not too worried about what you have to say… not much bite behind your bark
Nathaniel H. |
|
|
|
Moose Dragon
USA
128 Posts |
Posted - 04/17/2009 : 2:56:48 PM
|
Now now lets be nice, this is supposed to be a discussion about scoring systems not trying to figure out who's stick is bigger than who's.
I do not believe there will ever be a scoring system change in the APA. I do like the discussion though. |
|
|
|
Keith
USA
242 Posts |
Posted - 04/17/2009 : 7:06:29 PM
|
Phil
That is a hole in it and you could say the same for 9 ball. If the other team doesn't show you get 68 points in 9 ball. If it is too big a of a hole then you might want to look at the teams playing as that would be cheating. If you have any suggestions please post.
Nat when we played the only way you could explain the reason why I beat you was that I was a sandbagger. If I remember you and one of your team mates were yelling it out during my turns at the table. As for Travis we were joking around then he pulled the chair out. But he did apologize and was sincere. We left it at that. Travis was cool and I would like to see him come back to league some time.
Hey I was just told that we are supposed to make the balls in the pockets. That makes a big difference. |
|
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 04/17/2009 : 7:26:34 PM
|
It's not really a hole in 9-Ball. In fact, the whole reason we score 9-Ball forfeits the way we do (instead of a straight 15 points like the Team Manual says) is to discourage intentional forfeits. 68 is a really good night and it's unrealistic to feel "slighted" by "only" getting 68, but only getting 15 for a single forfeit could lead to a team forfeiting the last match to prevent their opponent from getting more than 15...
Phil
|
|
|
|
Torsten
USA
401 Posts |
Posted - 04/17/2009 : 10:23:31 PM
|
I'm not sure how this thread got so focused on forfeits, but I suppose I will perpetuate it. I don't recall exactly how long I've been in the league, but I'm guessing it's getting close to six years. (if taz or phil could maybe check on my start date that would actually be really cool) As of this week, I have 493 matches played. I've sat out countless other nights. Never once have I had an entire team not show up. At least two dozen times, other teams' captains have approached me about either make ups or pre matches to avoid forfeiture. Pretty much every time, I've been able to work it so the other team at the very least does not have to forfeit as much as they may otherwise have. I believe we are focusing on an illusionary problem. At least in the divisions I have competed in.
As Taz and Phil will likely be the first ones to tell you, our scoring system is not perfect. Neither is the handicapping system. But they're very good and very fair. Especially in 9 ball. I fancy any of my 1s, 2s, or 3s to have a realistic shot of getting their target number before their 7, 8, or 9 opponent gets theirs. Does this frequently happen? No. The better player, theoretically, should always eke out a close match. But I've personally watched my low players in 9 ball give high-ranked players a run for their money quite often.
The proof here is in the pudding. If the system as it is wasn't fair, we'd have no low players, and therefore no APA. We are a league about fun and friendly competition, but nobody wants to lose every week. Not me, not a brand new player. If you lose every time you play, you'll likely quit. Out of the hundreds and hundreds of players I've met in my time in the APA, I've known only one to quit because they couldn't win, and it was fluky. That's a story for another time.
To make a long post even longer, let me now expand this to the scoring system. The true beauty is in how simple it is. If you complicate stuff with multiple points for certain wins, extra points for remaining balls on the table, bonus points for nine rail banks, or whatever, you'll inevitably raise the odds of dispute and lower the odds of a rollicking good time, win or lose. Case in point, I have a teammate, who happens to be one of my best friends as well, who suffers from severe dyslexia. I will not embarrass this person by mentioning them by name, but this person has no problem keeping score at all. Why? Because it's user-friendly. When you over-complicate things, you compromise your objectives. And the APA's objective, and correct me if I'm wrong, is to provide pool lovers with an arena in which to satisfy their competitive desires in a really fun environment. The way I look at it is, I could pay hundreds of dollars a week for therapy, or I can play pool with my friends and make some new ones along the way.
I will close this ramble by thanking Nathaniel (whose respect is most certainly reciprocated) for his kind words, and encouraging all of you guys to ease up a bit on the personal aspect of this thread, and keep it as it is intended; as a forum for all of us to be creative and interactive.
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. |
|
|
|
Doug Gill
USA
92 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2009 : 01:03:54 AM
|
I suggest you still consider the therapy Torsten.......... |
|
|
|
Taz
USA
555 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2009 : 10:10:15 AM
|
| Torsten, your start date in APA league play was January 7, 2004. |
|
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2009 : 10:28:13 AM
|
Ok, back to partial credit in 8-Ball. As some of you have mentioned, there is no margin of victory in a game of 8-Ball. Balls left on the table mean nothing at all. In fact, scoring based on balls left would tend to encourage bad play, with players going for shots they should never be attempting. If you think about it for a while, I'm sure you would agree that the moment a player realizes that they don't have to run out or keep their opponent from making ANY balls is the moment that player becomes MUCH tougher to beat. 9-Ball, on the other hand, is almost the opposite. To improve at 9-Ball, you have to get past trying to ride the 9 every time and focus on shooting in sequence. There are certainly times in 9-Ball when you don't care who makes some of the balls early in the rack, but it's hardly ever true that you benefit from letting your opponent make them rather than doing it yourself. Thus, the scoring in each format tends to encourage players to play the "right" way, or learn a style that improves their overall ability in that format.
Scoring by points in 9-Ball also gives us a good way to handicap players. You can't handicap 9-Ball by games, because an early 9 wins the game. If you go to a pool hall and watch players match up, the weaker player usually gets some "weight" from the stronger player. In 9-Ball, the weight is NEVER games on the wire. It's always something based on progressing through the rack.
If we were to award partial credit in 8-Ball based on balls made or left on the table, then it would be possible to win the match without ever winning a game. Take the case of a 6 versus a 3. Suppose the 6 were to lose the first two games on 8-Ball scratches, without the 3 ever making a ball. Wouldn't the score be 14-2, in favor of the 6? What if the 6 wins the first three, then has two 8-Ball scratches? The final score of that match could be 59-2! It's an extreme case, but I don't think it would be uncommon to see matches where the losing player earns more points than the winner, especially in the uneven match-ups. Take that same match-up, for example. Let's say the 3 actually wins two games the normal way, and leaves the 6 with two balls each time. However, the 6 wins three games, leaving the 3 with five balls in each. The final score would be 49-26 in favor of the 6, wouldn't it? Sure, it might discourage captains from sacrificing the 2, but it would encourage them to create the same match-up the other way, and we would see many more of these lopsided match-ups during the regular session as teams try to get the big point spreads to advance in the standings.
So, partial credit in 8-Ball can't be based on balls made or balls left on the table. It would have to be based on games won. We have actually tried to come up with a system for splitting match points in 8-Ball, similar to what we do in 9-Ball. We even experimented with a system for a session in Ojai, but the consensus at the end of that session was that there just aren't enough games in a match to come up with a good spread of match points. If a 3 beats another 3 2-0, you really have no idea how close the match actually was.
I think the best we could ever do is something simple, like awarding three points to the winning player and one to the losing player IF that player gets to the hill. Every match would then be 3-0 or 3-1. Even that system would reward the 2's and 3's for doing nothing but being the recipient of an early 8 or 8-Ball scratch. Maybe that's ok, but it wouldn't be rewarding the player for shooting well, only for getting a lucky break.
Phil
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Suggest changing 8 ball scoring method
