Handicapping procedure Open / Handicap events

[Shockerz]

Our club the most you can get is 14, so if you have just picked up a cue that day and get drawn against one of the few that have had multiple 147s you get a 14 start.

Do you get many entries from the poorer players regularly?

[itsnoteasy]

Do you get many entries from the poorer players regularly?

Nope , the comps are dying on their bums, handicaps are very very hard to get right. The good players want the lesser players for the prize funds but they don't want to give them a sniff of winning, so you get six folk turning up to them, I don't think the £25 entrance fee helps either.

[Shockerz]

Nope , the comps are dying on their bums, handicaps are very very hard to get right. The good players want the lesser players for the prize funds but they don't want to give them a sniff of winning, so you get six folk turning up to them, I don't think the £25 entrance fee helps either.

Yeah it's difficult. I tend to run both scratch and handicap comps at the same time and the handicap gets the most entries because the majority of entrants are mediocre compared to the good players.

The scratch comps just about hold their own so I increase the frame count so there aren't any single frame matches.

Our league comps only have 30 or so entrants and the pairs comps a lot less as they are also scratch. I keep trying to push a separate handicap comp to increase entries from guys that don't bother in the scratch comps.

My thinking is that even if the handicaps are wrong, better wrong and lots of lesser players entering rather then no comp and no interest. At least some of those guys may get better and enter the scratch.

[stanzischke@gmail.com]

Good words

[mythman69]

We have a couple of different competition types.

Monday night we run a 6-red 10 minute knockout called lap-dash. Everyone pays $5 to enter and the winner gets the pot less $15 for second. The losing semi-finalists get 2 free beers. Winner loses 10 from their handicap, the runner up loses 5 from their handicap, semi-finalists stay on the same handicap and everyone else gets a point added to their handicap. Seems to work well and gives everyone a chance to win over the year. We also have draw for 2 beers after the first round and a draw for 5 beers after the final. So even if you lose in the first round you can still win. We get around 20 players plus a week.

We also have A-grade, B-grade and A & B grade competitions during the year. These are all handicapped events. If you win you lose 4 points, runner-up loses 2 points, semi-finalists stay on the same handicap and everyone else gets a point. The maximum is +40 and the minimum is -40.

The club championship is not handicapped so the best players want to win that competition but we find that most lower standard players don't bother to enter so the numbers are tiny for the main competition of the year.

I played in a team competition on the weekend against another club and the maximum handicap allowed was 50 start (except juniors possible maximum 60 start). I had to give between 40 and 50 start each match but managed to win 4 from 6 matches. There were lots of black ball frames and looking at the overall results the better players won only slightly more often then the other players.

It is a good feeling when you win after giving away a big start and not too bad when you lose after giving a big start. It can be hard when they just run away and pot single reds and then push the blue pink and black down the table rather than try to sink them. But hey, they are trying to win and they know this will limit your scoring and break building but then you get lots of practice snookering them and that is fun too.

Another idea for single matches rather than competitions that seems to work well when a good player plays a beginner for example. They are given a certain start (say 40) and if they win it drops by 5 points and if they lose it goes up 5 points. Next time they play they can continue the battle. The beginner strives to beat the better player with a lower start and the better player enjoys beating someone with a huge start. It is great when you give a 70 point start and win 100 to 85.

Anyway, food for thought.

[tomwalker147]

i weep for the future.

Yep...

I went to Gloucester a few months back for a handicap comp, handicaps were done based on players highest breaks. I had to give a lad 14, I broke off and he made 60 first poke. It was ridiculous.

[itsnoteasy]

Yep...

I went to Gloucester a few months back for a handicap comp, handicaps were done based on players highest breaks. I had to give a lad 14, I broke off and he made 60 first poke. It was ridiculous.

That's not a fault in handicaps though Tom, that's a fault with either the player telling lies or the handicapper not setting fair handicaps. I don't know how much money is made in these comps, but if it's a couple of hundred pound I'm quite surprised and saddened a wee bit that folk would sell their dignity down the river and lie about their standard . If that fella you played knocked in a sixty he should have been off scratch, IMO anyone who has a high break above one visit standard should be off scratch( I'm guessing his high break is a lot higher than sixty)I would have said something to the handicapper, or at least asked what he had claimed his high break was. Handicaps are there to encourage lesser players to enter, not for fly by nights to earn some pocket money.

[inevermissblue]

Well...I couldn't care less about the failings that are handicapped tournaments anymore, or the fact that nobody cares enough to try the previously suggested alternative. I just won't bother entering them. Which is perfectly fine, because little old me will have no impact on the stability of the game...not when its propped up by all these points grabbers!
I was quite pro-active for the game in the last couple of years. Running/setting up the NCC...trying to create a new league...cleaning tables etc etc... But now I realise that alot of it was a complete waste of my time and effort. So I am now just taking care of my own interests.
I have 2 venues that are virtually free to use, one being a star table. I am quite happy to hear about everyone's complaints about this and that from now on...especially now I know that taking positive action proves fruitless as soon as you call peoples bluff!
I'll just enjoy playing the game from now on! Nothing else matters!

[magicman]

Getting handicapped comps right is always hard but as Snookerdad says the idea is to give everyone an equal chance. In order for that to happen everyone has to be given a start relevant to their ability, whether its 24 or 40 off a scratch player or 80. We regularly get 25-30 in our handicaps and I've given 95 before and won! If the draw had been bad for me I could have been giving 106 to one guy.

The better players have scratch tournaments to compete in as well and must take the handicapped comps as a challenge, seeing them as an opportunity to improve their temperament, to practice getting snookers and tweak their shot choices.

[MrJSquishy]

Hi All,

First post on here (first day on here), but was doing some research re snooker handicap systems and stumbled across this forum. Unfortunately, it seems like all handicap systems are (essentially) the same i.e. a points start system. I have toyed with a completely new way to handicap and would love some feedback on what others think. But first, a bit of background. I live on the North Coast of NSW in Australia and numbers in snooker have declined drastically in the last 20 years that I have been playing. When I first started, there would be 30+ players every week, but, in the last couple of years, my club, has had as few as 5 players turn up for consecutive weeks. Sometimes for months at a time. And for me, handicap snooker is to blame. Hence my thoughts on coming up with a completely new idea...

My first thought was to look at a handicap system that works and try to work out why it didn't work in snooker. So, golf. The difference that I saw between these two 'systems' is that in golf, it handicaps the player, snooker tries to handicap a difference between two players. Which I think is the big issue. At our club we have players on handicaps between -10 and +70 (but our cap on starts is 60 points - another issue in itself). But, the players on 30-50 can be vastly different players (even some of the players between 0 & 20 can be vastly different). Some are knowledgeable and play to their tactical strength (perhaps of an ability of times past) while others are fantastic single ball potters but couldn't play a safety to save their lives. How do you compare the two? You can't. So, why are they on the same (roughly) handicap?

My system is different. Instead of handicapping a 'difference' between two players, each players handicap handicaps them alone. All games start from scratch, but, the scoring is different. The system is hard to explain (but, I could send detailed information to anyone who is interested), however, I will try to surmise it now.

Basically, each player plays off a percentage. In my system, that percentage is somewhere between 25% and 300%. As mentioned, all frames start off scratch. All breaks are counted as usual. But, when the break is finished, it is multiplied by whatever percentage the players handicap is and rounded up to the next whole point. This happens for all play when the reds are on the table. At the end (just the 6 colours) scoring reverts back to normal.

The difference with this system (apart from the obvious) is that it is handicapping the player, and the player alone. Irrespective of your opponent you play off the same handicap every frame. Handicaps are obviously adjusted periodically and my system relies on scoring alone i.e. a players handicap is lower for the players that score 'heavier' and higher for the players whose scoring is poor. I think one of the other mistakes with points start systems is that they are (generally) results based i.e. win more frames, handicap goes down, lose more frames, handicap goes up. And some systems are so quick to adjust (for example at my club they go up or down 2 points every frame dependent on who wins). That, to me, is wrong. A player has not improved or gone backwards in one frame. They have simply won, or lost a frame. There is a big difference between form and ability...

I did trial this system of mine at our club, but, due to such poor numbers of players it was very hard to get good 'data'. I think the theoretical side of it is good, but, would love more players to trial it and see what they think.

It also, in my opinion, changes the mentality of players playing the game. Too many times I have seen players, who I am giving 50+ start to (and btw I have given 118 points start in a frame years ago), pot a red, and irrespective of where they are on the table, go for the black, just to see it tied up on a cushion somewhere. It is a negative style of play, yet tactically (for the new player) a way to win. But, what does that bode for the future of that player? What happens when he/she gets to a point where they are giving 30 points start and realise they have never learnt to score points, only defend points? My system forces all players to score points, whether it's through laying snookers, or potting balls, it doesn't matter. It is forcing every player at every level to 'play hard' every frame. Even the better players who are only getting 40% of their points: they may make a 50 break (of which they get 20 points) and their opponent (a 300% handicapper) knocks in one red and one black and now leads by 4 points. I truly think it is a system that encourages positive, attacking snooker. And most games should be reasonably close i.e. everyone is getting an equal 'chance' to win the frame. And that should be what we are looking for, shouldn't it?

Feedback would be much appreciated.

Cheers

[Shockerz]

Personally the key bit for me in your story was that handicaps are to blame for the decline from 30+ players to 5 players hence you are looking into how to change the handicap system.

Snooker has had a decline in most places since the 80's but is still thriving in some. Our club had a decline in the 90's and then put a committee together to push.

You would probably need some help as a revival as it can be exhausting trying to keep everyone happy, we did the following and we have 230 members now and 4 thriving snooker teams.

Maybe try some of the following:

Write to all members telling them what's going on to make them feel they are missing something.

We do a handicap 3 reds tournement every Tuesday as a social event and have to close numbers as it is that popular; a fun event and it is handicapped.

Coach players that want to get into the game on the basics (advertise sessions in the local paper).

Any other types of clubs for retirees, give them an afternoon at reduced rates (ours was a Monday afternoon).

Get kids into it in the school hols or Saturday morning so they become members and continue as they leave school.

Put flyers up locally.

Do open comps for scratch players and handicap so both can enjoy when you get the numbers.

If you search the forum there are plenty of ideas but it's not easy and best to get help if possible as does take some energy. If you can interest youth clubs etc you may be plating a few seeds for later?

[cantpotforshíte]

Hi All,

First post on here (first day on here), but was doing some research re snooker handicap systems and stumbled across this forum. Unfortunately, it seems like all handicap systems are (essentially) the same i.e. a points start system. I have toyed with a completely new way to handicap and would love some feedback on what others think. But first, a bit of background. I live on the North Coast of NSW in Australia and numbers in snooker have declined drastically in the last 20 years that I have been playing. When I first started, there would be 30+ players every week, but, in the last couple of years, my club, has had as few as 5 players turn up for consecutive weeks. Sometimes for months at a time. And for me, handicap snooker is to blame. Hence my thoughts on coming up with a completely new idea...

My first thought was to look at a handicap system that works and try to work out why it didn't work in snooker. So, golf. The difference that I saw between these two 'systems' is that in golf, it handicaps the player, snooker tries to handicap a difference between two players. Which I think is the big issue. At our club we have players on handicaps between -10 and +70 (but our cap on starts is 60 points - another issue in itself). But, the players on 30-50 can be vastly different players (even some of the players between 0 & 20 can be vastly different). Some are knowledgeable and play to their tactical strength (perhaps of an ability of times past) while others are fantastic single ball potters but couldn't play a safety to save their lives. How do you compare the two? You can't. So, why are they on the same (roughly) handicap?

My system is different. Instead of handicapping a 'difference' between two players, each players handicap handicaps them alone. All games start from scratch, but, the scoring is different. The system is hard to explain (but, I could send detailed information to anyone who is interested), however, I will try to surmise it now.

Basically, each player plays off a percentage. In my system, that percentage is somewhere between 25% and 300%. As mentioned, all frames start off scratch. All breaks are counted as usual. But, when the break is finished, it is multiplied by whatever percentage the players handicap is and rounded up to the next whole point. This happens for all play when the reds are on the table. At the end (just the 6 colours) scoring reverts back to normal.

The difference with this system (apart from the obvious) is that it is handicapping the player, and the player alone. Irrespective of your opponent you play off the same handicap every frame. Handicaps are obviously adjusted periodically and my system relies on scoring alone i.e. a players handicap is lower for the players that score 'heavier' and higher for the players whose scoring is poor. I think one of the other mistakes with points start systems is that they are (generally) results based i.e. win more frames, handicap goes down, lose more frames, handicap goes up. And some systems are so quick to adjust (for example at my club they go up or down 2 points every frame dependent on who wins). That, to me, is wrong. A player has not improved or gone backwards in one frame. They have simply won, or lost a frame. There is a big difference between form and ability...

I did trial this system of mine at our club, but, due to such poor numbers of players it was very hard to get good 'data'. I think the theoretical side of it is good, but, would love more players to trial it and see what they think.

It also, in my opinion, changes the mentality of players playing the game. Too many times I have seen players, who I am giving 50+ start to (and btw I have given 118 points start in a frame years ago), pot a red, and irrespective of where they are on the table, go for the black, just to see it tied up on a cushion somewhere. It is a negative style of play, yet tactically (for the new player) a way to win. But, what does that bode for the future of that player? What happens when he/she gets to a point where they are giving 30 points start and realise they have never learnt to score points, only defend points? My system forces all players to score points, whether it's through laying snookers, or potting balls, it doesn't matter. It is forcing every player at every level to 'play hard' every frame. Even the better players who are only getting 40% of their points: they may make a 50 break (of which they get 20 points) and their opponent (a 300% handicapper) knocks in one red and one black and now leads by 4 points. I truly think it is a system that encourages positive, attacking snooker. And most games should be reasonably close i.e. everyone is getting an equal 'chance' to win the frame. And that should be what we are looking for, shouldn't it?

Feedback would be much appreciated.

Cheers

I think that this is a well thought out system, I've never heard of a handicap system before that doesn't encourage negative play, and this seems to do the trick.
However, some players will complain that it's unnecessarily complicated (although it isn't) and for some players, even with a calculator to hand they'd struggle to do the scores between them. It would need a referee who knows what he's doing for a lot of matches.
But, as a concept, it's an excellent idea.

[itsnoteasy]

Hi All,

First post on here (first day on here), but was doing some research re snooker handicap systems and stumbled across this forum. Unfortunately, it seems like all handicap systems are (essentially) the same i.e. a points start system. I have toyed with a completely new way to handicap and would love some feedback on what others think. But first, a bit of background. I live on the North Coast of NSW in Australia and numbers in snooker have declined drastically in the last 20 years that I have been playing. When I first started, there would be 30+ players every week, but, in the last couple of years, my club, has had as few as 5 players turn up for consecutive weeks. Sometimes for months at a time. And for me, handicap snooker is to blame. Hence my thoughts on coming up with a completely new idea...

My first thought was to look at a handicap system that works and try to work out why it didn't work in snooker. So, golf. The difference that I saw between these two 'systems' is that in golf, it handicaps the player, snooker tries to handicap a difference between two players. Which I think is the big issue. At our club we have players on handicaps between -10 and +70 (but our cap on starts is 60 points - another issue in itself). But, the players on 30-50 can be vastly different players (even some of the players between 0 & 20 can be vastly different). Some are knowledgeable and play to their tactical strength (perhaps of an ability of times past) while others are fantastic single ball potters but couldn't play a safety to save their lives. How do you compare the two? You can't. So, why are they on the same (roughly) handicap?

My system is different. Instead of handicapping a 'difference' between two players, each players handicap handicaps them alone. All games start from scratch, but, the scoring is different. The system is hard to explain (but, I could send detailed information to anyone who is interested), however, I will try to surmise it now.

Basically, each player plays off a percentage. In my system, that percentage is somewhere between 25% and 300%. As mentioned, all frames start off scratch. All breaks are counted as usual. But, when the break is finished, it is multiplied by whatever percentage the players handicap is and rounded up to the next whole point. This happens for all play when the reds are on the table. At the end (just the 6 colours) scoring reverts back to normal.

The difference with this system (apart from the obvious) is that it is handicapping the player, and the player alone. Irrespective of your opponent you play off the same handicap every frame. Handicaps are obviously adjusted periodically and my system relies on scoring alone i.e. a players handicap is lower for the players that score 'heavier' and higher for the players whose scoring is poor. I think one of the other mistakes with points start systems is that they are (generally) results based i.e. win more frames, handicap goes down, lose more frames, handicap goes up. And some systems are so quick to adjust (for example at my club they go up or down 2 points every frame dependent on who wins). That, to me, is wrong. A player has not improved or gone backwards in one frame. They have simply won, or lost a frame. There is a big difference between form and ability...

I did trial this system of mine at our club, but, due to such poor numbers of players it was very hard to get good 'data'. I think the theoretical side of it is good, but, would love more players to trial it and see what they think.

It also, in my opinion, changes the mentality of players playing the game. Too many times I have seen players, who I am giving 50+ start to (and btw I have given 118 points start in a frame years ago), pot a red, and irrespective of where they are on the table, go for the black, just to see it tied up on a cushion somewhere. It is a negative style of play, yet tactically (for the new player) a way to win. But, what does that bode for the future of that player? What happens when he/she gets to a point where they are giving 30 points start and realise they have never learnt to score points, only defend points? My system forces all players to score points, whether it's through laying snookers, or potting balls, it doesn't matter. It is forcing every player at every level to 'play hard' every frame. Even the better players who are only getting 40% of their points: they may make a 50 break (of which they get 20 points) and their opponent (a 300% handicapper) knocks in one red and one black and now leads by 4 points. I truly think it is a system that encourages positive, attacking snooker. And most games should be reasonably close i.e. everyone is getting an equal 'chance' to win the frame. And that should be what we are looking for, shouldn't it?

Feedback would be much appreciated.

Cheers

Someone with a high handicap gets a sixteen break then a ten break and gets fifty or sixty for it, what's their next shot? I'm guessing black on a Cush or up the baulk end. That means the good player ( if he only gets twenty for a fifty break) can't win can he? Not quite done the maths but it will be close.

[Big Splash!]

Handicap systems are rubbish, but you can make them better by narrowing the start. Our own league was up to an 85 start and players would pot a red, black red, and then mess the table up. Now the max is 56pts so there's still plenty left on and a good player who gives a 56 start should be able to use pinks and blues to get back into the frame even if the black is on a cush. The whole idea is that on average, the frame should end on the black if the HCs are right. If a player wins a lot of frames, his handicap gets cut, if a player does badly, his HC increases. Players will go through peaks and troughs over many years, such is form.

Personally, I think HCs should be abandoned altogether. Allow the cream to rise to the top and teams to relegate to a division that is their standard. I'm fed up of seeing teams win titles because of handicaps. They don't have the skill to do it on merit. It's a joke. And HCs are a safety net that does not encourage players to practice and improve. Some of them have told me they don't want to practise and improve too much because their HCs will get cut! Bunch of fakes.

[Shockerz]

Handicap systems are rubbish, but you can make them better by narrowing the start. Our own league was up to an 85 start and players would pot a red, black red, and then mess the table up. Now the max is 56pts so there's still plenty left on and a good player who gives a 56 start should be able to use pinks and blues to get back into the frame even if the black is on a cush. The whole idea is that on average, the frame should end on the black if the HCs are right. If a player wins a lot of frames, his handicap gets cut, if a player does badly, his HC increases. Players will go through peaks and troughs over many years, such is form.

Personally, I think HCs should be abandoned altogether. Allow the cream to rise to the top and teams to relegate to a division that is their standard. I'm fed up of seeing teams win titles because of handicaps. They don't have the skill to do it on merit. It's a joke. And HCs are a safety net that does not encourage players to practice and improve. Some of them have told me they don't want to practise and improve too much because their HCs will get cut! Bunch of fakes.

I run all sorts of comps in the club, scratch and handicap. The handicap boys moan at all opportunities about it's not fair and I must admit it's tiring especially when you listen to the guys managing their wins and losses in preparation for upcoming events. When I look to see who practices regularly, it's always the scratch and minus handicappers. Just different attitudes.

I had to have a word with a club captain on more than one occasion last year as he was conceding games when he could still win as he didn't want to get promoted to Div one and his team mates were getting annoyed, go figure.....