Are snooker handicaps wrong ??

[deant1982]

I'm not really a fan of handicap snooker, for a few reasons.
It is hard to judge an "average" player's skill level on a consistant basis. I have seen average players have a shocking display and not make it to double figures, then follow up in the next frame by potting everything in sight and playing at a level to compete against anybody, just because it all went right for them.
Another reason I am opposed to them, is that when I was younger (14-17) I gave up a lot of my social life to practice and become good at snooker, and whilst I have only ever made 2 100's, I have made loads of 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's, which at amateur level is more often than not enough to win a frame. Mixed with a very good tactical game, made me a very dangerous opponant. Why should I be punished with having to give a start to other people that had not put the same dedication in as I did, to improve my game, yet they get a good chance to beat me?
At risk of sounding egotistical, I have played the lesser quality players off levels and destroyed them on many occasions, however I have also lost frames to the same players (through their good play or my bad play). I have also played them for money (their suggestion, not mine) but they insisted on the condition that they receive a head start. This is all well and good, as long as they were not taking the mickey. One regular league player (one division below me at the time) wanted 35 head start for £1!
I realise that everybody has different circumstances, and not everybody is able to practice the same amount of time that I used to, but that is not my fault. I got myself to the good standard I acheived by making sacrifices, and sheer hard work and determination to be better. Long hours practicing on my own in an empty, cold snooker room to improve my break building, long potting, shot selection, and cue action. If they are not prepared to make the same sacrifices, then don't complain to me that I keep beating you and its boring. Do what I did, give up your "TV night" or going the pub with your mates or whatever, and practice to get yourself to a standard where you can expect to beat me.
*Rant over*!
Dean

[The Statman]

I'm not really a fan of handicap snooker, for a few reasons.
It is hard to judge an "average" player's skill level on a consistant basis. I have seen average players have a shocking display and not make it to double figures, then follow up in the next frame by potting everything in sight and playing at a level to compete against anybody, just because it all went right for them.
Another reason I am opposed to them, is that when I was younger (14-17) I gave up a lot of my social life to practice and become good at snooker, and whilst I have only ever made 2 100's, I have made loads of 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's, which at amateur level is more often than not enough to win a frame. Mixed with a very good tactical game, made me a very dangerous opponant. Why should I be punished with having to give a start to other people that had not put the same dedication in as I did, to improve my game, yet they get a good chance to beat me?
At risk of sounding egotistical, I have played the lesser quality players off levels and destroyed them on many occasions, however I have also lost frames to the same players (through their good play or my bad play). I have also played them for money (their suggestion, not mine) but they insisted on the condition that they receive a head start. This is all well and good, as long as they were not taking the mickey. One regular league player (one division below me at the time) wanted 35 head start for £1!
I realise that everybody has different circumstances, and not everybody is able to practice the same amount of time that I used to, but that is not my fault. I got myself to the good standard I acheived by making sacrifices, and sheer hard work and determination to be better. Long hours practicing on my own in an empty, cold snooker room to improve my break building, long potting, shot selection, and cue action. If they are not prepared to make the same sacrifices, then don't complain to me that I keep beating you and its boring. Do what I did, give up your "TV night" or going the pub with your mates or whatever, and practice to get yourself to a standard where you can expect to beat me.
*Rant over*!
Dean

Yes that's all well and good, but the point of the competitions - in my club, anyway - is to provide a fun evening with prize money while spending money at the club.

If it were not for the handicaps, what low-standard player is going to put money into someone else's pocket, essentially, by paying an entrance fee which they are never going to recoup?

We used to have the first comp of each month as a scratch comp and it was the more serious players - those with a chance (even an outside one) of getting some money back in prize money - with the other Saturdays a handicapped comp. It was the scratch one which died a death of non-interest.

At the end of the day, the club has to cater for its members, whether they be wannabe pros or lads or gents just using snooker as a means to meet up and socialise.

[mick farrell]

I'm not really a fan of handicap snooker, for a few reasons.
It is hard to judge an "average" player's skill level on a consistant basis. I have seen average players have a shocking display and not make it to double figures, then follow up in the next frame by potting everything in sight and playing at a level to compete against anybody, just because it all went right for them.
Another reason I am opposed to them, is that when I was younger (14-17) I gave up a lot of my social life to practice and become good at snooker, and whilst I have only ever made 2 100's, I have made loads of 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's, which at amateur level is more often than not enough to win a frame. Mixed with a very good tactical game, made me a very dangerous opponant. Why should I be punished with having to give a start to other people that had not put the same dedication in as I did, to improve my game, yet they get a good chance to beat me?
At risk of sounding egotistical, I have played the lesser quality players off levels and destroyed them on many occasions, however I have also lost frames to the same players (through their good play or my bad play). I have also played them for money (their suggestion, not mine) but they insisted on the condition that they receive a head start. This is all well and good, as long as they were not taking the mickey. One regular league player (one division below me at the time) wanted 35 head start for £1!
I realise that everybody has different circumstances, and not everybody is able to practice the same amount of time that I used to, but that is not my fault. I got myself to the good standard I acheived by making sacrifices, and sheer hard work and determination to be better. Long hours practicing on my own in an empty, cold snooker room to improve my break building, long potting, shot selection, and cue action. If they are not prepared to make the same sacrifices, then don't complain to me that I keep beating you and its boring. Do what I did, give up your "TV night" or going the pub with your mates or whatever, and practice to get yourself to a standard where you can expect to beat me.
*Rant over*!
Dean

Spot on Dean!
Where I come from, local pool competitions are not handicapped, darts is not handicapped but snooker competitions are ALWAYS handicapped.

[Souwester]

I can understand where Dean is coming from but I think The Statman makes the point that, in most cases, handicapped competitions, are more fun events where anyone can enter and have a chance of winning. Why shouldn't there be competitions for the more casual player? As Statman illustrates, if you have only scratch competitions then the less able, mostly casual players, just won't bother parting with their money because they know they won't win any prize money, and will likely be knocked out in the first round. It would be a sad state of affairs if the only competitions were appropriate for a small elite of top quality players.

A good club or league should provide a mix of scratch and handicap events, but the former are always going to struggle with numbers at local level, as Statman has shown.

[pottingpinks]

Yes cueboy (see earlier thread) was talking about the league I play in I think.

We did alter the handicap system last year though so that handicap starts were given in the league as well as the individual competitions and personally thought it worked much better, the problem we had was that lots of different abilities had all merged into one division (having initially started with three divisions but clubs had dropped out over the years) so it was massively un-competitive and teams were dropping out like flies at the bottom of the league, often not even completing their matches.

Not sure why you say it isn't being done right now as I thought it was pretty satisfactory tbh. There are a few things that need minor tinkering but for saying it was the first proper year of handicapping the league as a whole thought it went pretty well.

The main problem was that the first re-assessment point came too early in the season really and if someone won a couple of frames early doors and then hardly won a game in the next two thirds of the season it was too late for them as they were stuck off the same mark (plus the bad weather knocked out a few matches to exacerbate this). So I think this year its important to get it right in the middle of the season so theres a reasonable number of matches played to judge it on.

And as an extra safeguard the winning percentage under which players are eligible to drop down a handicap bracket should maybe go up slightly so theres very little chance of the same thing happening this time around.

Also a few players who moved up a bracket during the season struggled afterwards so I do think the 7pt jumps were a bit high in a few cases (e.g. if at the same time another player dropped down a notch, the higher ranked player could be giving 14pts extra in the second half of the year to that player compared to the first half). So I'd personally agree with what one or two suggested to me, having an extra bracket or two and making it 5pts between each one and going from 0-45.

Though equally I wouldn't mind too much if we could play the league off scratch and the cup competitions off a handicap providing there's two divisions split ability wise to avoid any obvious mis-matches as much as possible.

The idea was not to handicap the top players out of it anyhow, just to make the matches more competitive and I think this goal was achieved, it may not look that way from the league table compared to the previous year but I do believe there was a bigger gulf this year between the top couple of teams and those below them due to some players dropping out of the latter teams.

If you look at the percentages, the higher rated players won the most games whatever starts were being given (7,14,21,28,35 or 42), strangely enough the more points players tended to concede, the higher the percentage of games they won. I think with 42 head start between the top and bottom ranked players that does give both players some sort of chance in most cases - at least with most players involved in our league - and if you bump it up much more than that the lesser player would maybe only need to pot two or three balls at the end to win. And wheres the sense of achievement in that.

What I'm hoping will be done is that we have less "aggregate to count" competitions in the knockout cups, which I think greatly favour the better players (they are more likely to win by a big score in any one frame than the lesser players - despite the handicap system - due to their better breakbuilding capacity). If the lesser player does win a frame its often just by a small number of points thanks to him holding on with the help of the original handicap. Go back to straight frames in a few of them and that will help even things out I think.

And run the Plate competition in the event that is decided on the aggregate basis so the losers get a second chance.

Plus if we can run an end of season play off for the top four teams in each division that would help maintain interest throughout the season too and slightly lower ranked teams would have far more chance of toppling say the champions in a one off match than they did over the whole league season.

But yes I can see the point with handicaps, why should someone who makes more effort to improve his game keep giving more and more start as he becomes more adept to someone who doesnt make any effort at all maybe yet maybe ends up taking the spoils with the help of 35pts on his tally from the off or whatever. But as long as the top ranking player is still winning a greater percentage of the matches at the end of the season I don't think he can complain too much as its in the league's interests to have at least a reasonably competitive league to keep everyone happy obviously.

I can't see much fun in two hopelessly mismatched players playing off scratch and the frame just turning out into a complete non-contest, which I witnessed quite a few times the season before last and it does no one any good at all.

But we can't really be potentially giving someone wins on a plate either (e.g. about 60 start) so that they only need to pot one or two balls at the end; thats the way I'd view it anyhow.

The players who make the most effort and are most talented do tend to win the most trophies though I'm trying to encourage the committee to bring in more cup competitions, as already stated alter a few things that currently favour the better players and trial a few novelty events that will give Average Joe or a lesser player a better chance of winning something during the season. And bring in a variety of formats that hopefully just make it fun to play, win lose or draw.

[CUEBOY1]

i didnt no it had been altered ricki, as i did not enter any this year! had a breif look and i noticed my brother is on -28 yet scott and ben are on -35? theres no way if i were doing it he would get 7 start! wotever scott and ben are off he shud be also and martyn taylor!

i also forgot got to mention in my original post, i wonder if fellow players who are regarded as the better players i.e 100 break men might have experience and there thoughts on this;

i have noticed extremly often when giving starts especially around the 28 -40 range the player gettin the start there confidence is through the roof and they start potting balls they would normally miss a high percentage of the time! and start stringing more little runs together than they normally would also!

i also notice when i give a start i play a differnt game! my shot selection changes and what players that receive starts dont realise is that a 28 start often is as good as a 40 start with the pyshology of the lesser player having a massive boost and the better player always starting in a losing position and under preasure! totally oposite ends of the spectrum! i know the thread was originally about the lesser players, but weres the thougt for the chaps giving the start! and quite often giving stupid starts that are in a differnt stratosphere!

correct me if im wrong here but was that comp you beat me in the final of the other year! was it called the open scratch competition which i assumed was a scratch comp thats why i entered it! but when it came to fruision i actually gave a start out! i think i gave you 28 in the final?

i will finalise! if i think or ever go 2 a comp were there handicap judgement is lets say a bit scew wiff! i dont enter or i dont go again! simples! so as for encouraging lesser players the flip side is puts the better players off! i do actually think tho from the ones ive met personnaly they are quite happy not to have the better players enter!

pride myself on never takin a start ever! wen i first started i played with a chap every saturday for 40 embassy number1s lol he used to woop me non stop 10-2 10-3 weeks on end! my mentality was ill get u ya bar steward! i learnt the hard way! and yes i did get the bar steward! he carnt touch me now!

[CUEBOY1]

BTW (DEANT1982) ure my kinda guy like ya attitude and mental aproach! a great quality to have! shame we carnt bottle it and sell it!

were do you play at! ill come give u a nok but i want 28 start

just 2 reiterate im not anti handicaps dont like em but i see the need for them! just as long as there policed correct! also theres more lol thute id done!

handicapping 1 frame snooker league matches is a mine field going out for your weekly snook match for 1 frame 2 give a silly start out for your opponent to deliberatly nok pink and black save etc is most definatly not my idea of fun! and when they give it the big one wen theve beat ya is just sad and un gentlemanly! i actually have more woes about handicapps than i realised lol! ive got a few more but ill keep them in me back pocket for now!

Cheers Jim

[pottingpinks]

Heres the handicap stats from last year:

SINGLES MATCHES

GIVING 7: won 43 lost 42 = 50.5%
GIVING 14: won 33 lost 23 = 58.9%
GIVING 21:won 22 lost 9 = 70.9%
GIVING 28: won 14 lost 7 = 66.0%
GIVING 35: won 12 lost 3 = 80.0%
GIVING 42: won 5 lost 1 = 83.0%

DOUBLES MATCHES

GIVING 4-7: won 15 lost 11 = 57.6%
GIVING 11-14: won 7 lost 4 = 63.6%
GIVING 18-21: won 6 lost 2 = 75.0%
GIVING 25-32: won 9 lost 1 = 90.0%
GIVING 35-42: no occurrences

So as you can see where the biggest starts were given, the better player had a very high strike rate, better than where there was only a small handicap so I dont think they were too inconvenienced by it. Would say we got it about right.

There are different mindsets of course with handicaps. Its probably like you say that you start off in the wrong frame of mind when you are giving a start and it affects your play instead of not thinking about it and playing your normal game. I think theres a lad at Bolehill who's similar in that he seems to play way below standard when giving start against players he really ought to beat on all known form.

Andy G is actually quite likely to go down to a lower bracket as he only won 2 of his last 8 games, I think he'd hardly lost until his handicap went up at the halfway stage; though he still seemed to be potting well when I saw him he just seemed to be picking out some quite ambitious shots, probably trying to knock off the points too quickly I dunno.

I suppose some leagues handicap on breakbuilding ability rather than actual results but depends how people look at it, as Scott says its not just down to how well you can score when you get in. I dont think I've ever even had a 50 break in the league (OK I think I've had the odd few higher than that in cup matches over the years) but can sometimes stay in touch just with a bit of tactical play even if I dont score as well when I get the chance.

I must admit I do quite like handicaps myself but only to make matches a little more competitive with the onus on the lesser player having to play maybe a touch above himself to actually get over the line.

Quite enjoyed the Bolehill handicap anyyhow this year as I won it despite giving 28 and 35 in every round, thought I had no chance before the start but didn't look at the scoreboard much until the later stages of the frame and then took it from there, thats probably the best way to do it. Unless you are getting the start yourself, then best to look at it as much as you can as early as possible lol.

But yes there are people who dont like taking starts, we've had the odd one at Bolehill (err Alan springs to mind when he played Ian once) but in my experience they usually lose; the handicaps are there for a reason - cos you're not as good as the other bloke - so can't see the point in not taking them really.

Fair enough if the system is skewed as it probably was in retrospect in years gone by in our league. Just three or four people tended to be picked out and they gave one fairly hefty start to every other player in the league which was a bit daft really as there were many differing levels of play amongst all those other players.

Even this year though have heard the odd player say only a few should be handicapped so old habits die hard, the majority think its much better as it is now though!

[wildJONESEYE]

Snooker is a game of winning frames how you achieve that is up to you and your best tactic to achieve that.

a century break maker playing a 20 break Grinder as long as that Grinder sticks to his Game Plan and plays each shot based on his limited ability he has every chance to win which is slightly different to Golf where Handicap System does Help.

so giving a Grinder a 20 to 30 point lead based on Handicap would only help in his guest to Grind out a Frame.

[CUEBOY1]

i really dont see how such as andy g handicap can go lower! regardless of recent results! he is of the same ability as ben and scott and taylor! common fact all players have dips and rises in form!

if he played in my league he would be levels against the above regardless!

i do actually find handicaps easy to sort example i run the comps in derby last 2 years and one comp is handicapped with over 60 entries both years not one single complaint! helps i know when you know all players but thats how you handicap on knowledge and ability!

saw your stats and 2 be honest dont understand them! each player is different! i seem to have found a happy balance with zero complaints i rekon ill stik 2 my method!

i could actually quite easily handicap your players in about 30 minutes need a bit of guidence on the ones i dont know! ok lets have a bit of fun here! send me a list Mr pinks of all your players and i will handicap them! then you do the same and lets compare stats

[pottingpinks]

OK will do when I get a minute.

I agree Andy G will probably go back up again at half way but we have to be fair, if someone loses over half their games off a very high handicap I dont think thats right really and thats the idea, people will be going up and down according to their form every half season (if we keep the handicaps that is).

Otherwise, we'll play the leagues off scratch and just have the handicaps in the cups which I also think would be fair enough; that way we'd only have to change the handicaps at the end of every season.

To be honest most of the ratings that were slightly out I was overruled on at the meeting (and dare I say it proved right later on mostly!) so think my list was as good as owt if I say so myself lol.

Alan was even going to handicap them originally even though he'd hardly seen anyone play for 2 years; but in the end he left it to us as he had to go in the hospital for his op.

One massive thing that can affect it from year to year is how much people are practising. For instance Colin from our team did really well the previous year - he's more of a grinding type of player really as mentioned above - so had to go on a highish rating but then in the meantime he completely stopped playing apart from match nights so his standard dipped below the level of his handicap (although he did win more than a quarter of his games which was the cut-off point for dropping down one).

Though we said in the close season we'd address cases like himself and Andy who lost at least a couple more than they won off highish ratings so that they can go back to a more suitable level according to their recent results.

Conversely I've probably played more the last 2-3 years since when I was in my twenties and results have improved so obviously I'm due another rise this year (to the same level as Andy G) though think I will be hard pushed to contain him off levels admittedly!

But as the above poster says, its not totally down to potting and breakbuilding, though it helps admittedly! I've asked other leagues how they handicap and some do it solely on the break stats which would suit me much more really, as I tend to have an OK winning percentage without really making too many high breaks (or indeed any lol).

Some even have a handicap system where you go up 2pts and down 2pts every time you win or lose a game but to me people's abilities are not changing to that extent week on week so really I think a fairly fixed handicap is preferable with a review stage (as long as we get the dynamics of it right).

I know Dwayne was advocating something like that but with 7pt increments, but I think that would soon throw everything way out of sync, people would be going up and down like yo yos and the jumps would be far too severe in too short a time span I think.

In fact looking through our website of UK leagues it seems most use a system of less than 7pts for their handicaps, and I'd say if you are changing them during the season, thats probably more adviseable, as we saw in our league even one re-adjustment made it very difficult for one or two players, they went from winning most games to hardly winning any more or less overnight, which probably wasn't a total coincidence.

Of course we may get some new teams this year so that could make it interesting!!

Re the stats, theres nothing complicated about them, all it shows is the percentage of games won by the player who was giving a start, those that were giving 42 won 83.3%, those that were giving 35 won 80% etc so thats still quite high, though admittedly it would most certainly be 100% if they were playing off levels.

[CUEBOY1]

can i enter next season? and what is my handicap! ill sign for bolehill!

[Sneaky-Pete]

Whats this then, a personal messaging site for Cluelessboy1 and Spottypink?

Best way to run a handicap, if you want to play in such a competition, is to put down the handicaps and put them in an envelope and only show the handicap when the frame has finished.

How do you play the miss rule for players who have no idea of getting out of a snooker?

As has been said previously the handicap system nearly always leads to the better players winning. Never enter a handicap comp, my best advice, all they create is bickering and backbiting.

Sneaky-Pete

[CUEBOY1]

Spot on Pete! handicaps are rank! lets leave the handicaps to those that want em! cus there sure as **** carnt do it right! snooker aint a handicap sport! wot is! ? u carnt be a true winner! winning with a start! how cud u sleep noing uve won by default! well summed up olde bill! thats why i love ya! proper players wudnt even talk such ****! we win or lose on our our own merits!

full respect to the legend sneaky pete! time 2 fook this thread off! and let them squabble between themselves! id rather pack up than discuss this crap! anyone who thinks handicapps are correct shus sod off and play marbles! and leave proper players alone! or go back 2 infant school! zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz bored of it now! just dont enter! fancy a best of 9 sneaky pete! u sound my kinda guy! st8 talkin and talks sence! 2 many cowboys on here and not enuff indians! if u want ya handicaps fook off elsewere! and get a wheel chair! then ya handicapped! DOUNUTS! noit all but some SORRY but cum on! olde bills sneaky petes a legend locally! he aint at his best but hes got pride and morals he wud never take a start of no one! personal view now is! whinge and whine about handoicaps just dont play! and chuck ya cue in the bin! BORING! if u carnt me and pete will burn it 4 ya! love cueboy & pete ! aka Bill Clarke! fookin ell bill this threads done me boots in! walkin away! tell em 2 **** off and play marbles or summat! just talk **** elsewere! YAWN! P.S kettles on pete! me hands better! im ready 4 ya!

[CUEBOY1]

Afore i go! my preference is 2 let the cue do tha talkin ! win or lose! i cudna go home sayin 2 the wife ive won a comp wen ive had a start! shed kick me out and divorse me on the spot! and who wud blame her!