Are snooker handicaps wrong ??

[pottingpinks]

No squabbling on here as far as I can see except maybe in Cueboys last post, which I'm assuming he might have had a drink before typing as its totally out of context with the rest of his stuff lol.

I'm not one for this macho posturing of I dont want a start etc, to me that belongs in the dark ages, surely handicaps are a sensible solution where there are lots of different abilities in the same league.

Noticed Jim in your league you were averaging about 100pts a frame so that clearly wasn't competitive snooker, the folk you were playing would soon get fed up of that every year if it was year in year out though I appreciate you will move up a division next year.

But thats been the problem we have with only having one sole division in the league, people will only stay on the end of a battering ram for so long before saying enough is enough.

Nothing more boring that sitting there and watching total mismatch after total mismatch where you know the result before it even starts.

Anyway looks like we'll agree to disagree, sent you the handicap list Jim if you are still interested.

Hey up Bill, sorry Pete, I think that was a Joe Davis idea wasn't it, to run comps where there was an undisclosed handicap in an envelope which was revealed after the frame had been played, now even I would probably draw the line at that lol, even though I do tend to like things that bring a bit of variety into the game.

As I say there hasn't been any bickering, not sure where this idea is coming from (Jim seems to have assumed it); everyone has just put forward constructive ideas where things might be improved but the feedback has been very good overall (apart from Cueboy!).

We don't play the miss rule in our league, its generally assumed that folk are trying their best to hit the ball and even if there may be an element of safety in some of the attempts, I think theres such a spectrum of playing standards it would be unfair to penalise players many times over who just weren't capable of finding the right angles.

[Sneaky-Pete]

Spotypinky, I'm dislexus (Japanese spelling).
I can understand you having a handicap system if you only have one league, and the same players each year.
Your stats, however, do show the top players still being successful even giving large starts.
Sort them out, give um hell make them give more start, double it, or keep increasing it each couple of matches, not half way through the season.

Last I'm going to say, only replied because you wrote a lot last time and you didn't make a spelling mistake, well done, pottyspanky.

Your mate, Sneakers-Petey

[pottingpinks]

I'll also say Scott who is of a similar level to yourself Jim is a big advocate of handicaps and finds no fun in "beating up" these lesser players time and again, he wants to challenge himself that bit more by making himself have to play a bit more seriously to win the frame.

I had the same feelings in the Bolehill handicap, giving start and having a good competitive game against some of the players who are either less experienced or are getting on a bit (not far off the latter myself now!!)

What you are trying to suggest is that obviously lesser players shouldnt take the start, and you should carry on bashing them up week after week almost like a flat track bully; you know full well you are one of the best players in the local leagues. Surely you want a competitive match every week to test yourself?

Yes the handicap system was skewed the last time you entered (a few years ago) - the first thing I proposed when I started going to the meetings was to get it altered - but why keep harping on about it all the time, and trying to make out its still as bad as it was?

I wonder if your views on handicapping would be any different if you were one of the weaker players, I think your stance might change then somehow, its very convenient saying people shouldnt take a start when there's hardly any chance that you will ever be in that position anyhow in any local league.

[pottingpinks]

Cheers Pete, I think I did make a spelling mistake there somewhere but had to go back and alter it, always used to be top of the class on spelling or near enough so got to keep my standards up lol.

I said earlier my idea of the handicap isnt to make it a totally level playing field, its just to make things more competitive with the onus on the lesser player having to play SLIGHTLY above himself to win, as we dont want to deprive the best talent of winning things overall (at least in the league). The billiards is run on similar lines.

OK not everyone will agree with that and I think there might be a place for a genuine handicap competition that truly equalises everyone, maybe a cup competition if the league was played off scratch so we could have the best of both worlds.

But starts would need to go sky high for some players to compete, some of our young lads who started the season up at our club would have needed about 75 or 80 against some of the better players, not sure what Jim would make of that.

[pottingpinks]

Should just point out also that our current handicap system was restricted to 0-28 until the Christmas break (as thats all the Committee would initially sanction), before being extended to 0-42 for the remaining games and hence the end game figures you see don't tell the whole story.

So don't think we should be so quick to dismiss the current process when in time it would prove pretty accurate if there were no restrictions on top or bottom and it was kept as a genuine rolling handicap. Its just that most people I spoke to seemed to think that 42pts or thereabouts was the right cap (the maximum for years and years was only 21 from an A to a C rated player - in the days of three divisions - so thats still quite an increase).

For instance Ben would go to -42 as he won 13 of his 14 games off -35; Scott likewise as he was unbeaten and at the other end of the scale the players who struggled would go to +14 instead of +7 (thats if it was agreed was no cap on it of course).

Though in other cases we saw what effect the change of handicap had; Andy G won 6 out of 6 off -21 but only 6 out of 14 off -28; Steve B won 6 out of 7 off -14 but only 4 out of 12 off -21.

At the other end Adam B won 2 out of 9 off Scratch but then 8 out of 11 off +7; Rob M won 1 out of 4 off -7 and then 4 out of 5 off Scratch so it wasn't as if the changes had no effect to alot of players as you can see.

And hence I can understand why some players suggested having smaller steps / more handicap bands (without distorting the overall span of the entire pool).

But as it is, and left to its own devices the handicap range would right now be up to 56 (from 42) and potentially 70 by the mid-point of the season, so its fairly quickly getting into the ranges of what Pete was suggesting (if you wanted to go down those lines).

[Souwester]

One thing to bear in mind with a handicap system that the total points in the handicap system should remain approximately equal from event to event.

I can remember a club competition I used to play in where, initially, the handicaps altered each event based on last event's performance... something like last 32 losers +10 points, last 16 losers +5 points, lose in quarters remain the same, losing semis -5, losing finalist -10 and winner -15. Now that means that the total change is for the overall handicaps to go up by 165 points. After several events, the vast majority of players were on massive handicaps.

[nrage]

One thing to bear in mind with a handicap system that the total points in the handicap system should remain approximately equal from event to event.

I can remember a club competition I used to play in where, initially, the handicaps altered each event based on last event's performance... something like last 32 losers +10 points, last 16 losers +5 points, lose in quarters remain the same, losing semis -5, losing finalist -10 and winner -15. Now that means that the total change is for the overall handicaps to go up by 165 points. After several events, the vast majority of players were on massive handicaps.

I've mentioned it before in handicap discussions but I'll say it again .. the best system to use, is the ELO system, which shifts a players ranking based on who they play, as well as the result. So, the expected outcome has a much smaller shift in ranking, vs the unexpected. So, losing to someone better than you, or beating someone worse than you shifts your ranking by a small amount. But, beat someone better than you, or lose to someone worse and your ranking shifts by a larger amount. It's used in chess, but would be even simpler to use in snooker as a draw is not a possible outcome. It is more complex to calculate and where used they tend to use a computer to perform the calculations and ranking etc.

[pottingpinks]

I'd agree nrage in an ideal world, in one of the player's instances I outlined above, where he had a high winning percentage in the first part of the season he'd actually played mostly lower ranked players where he was expected to win anyway really; then his handicap changed and he drew tougher players off the higher rating and couldnt cope too well.

But as you say the difficulty is implementing it properly and I think theres next to no chance the current establishment would want to adopt it due to the extra workload (not that I am part of that, but I know how the thought processes go!) And to be honest, think it would end up as a big muddle lol.

[CUEBOY1]

is thers a poll facility on this forum! sneaky pete is the man 2 set a poll up would be interestin to see who is for or against handicaps and maybe if players who vote also listed there highest break mite get a rough idea of what all levels of play thing to handicaps!

i will add as i dont think i have mentioned! i would also say that over longer matches i.e best of 5s or 7s the player giving the handicap is more likely 2 win than in a 1 frame game were i beleive the opposite is true! all that obvs depending that the handicap is pretty fair!

[pottingpinks]

I think there is a poll facility Jim though not sure if a new thread is required or not. You aren't allowed to vote 200 times though you know lol. Anyway have booked you in with Eric the Nurse for some handicap aversion therapy, you'll soon be begging folk to have a 28 head start before you agree to get your cue out!!

Handicap or not looking forward to the new season anyway after the summer recess, another few weeks and will be ready to roll again!

[komakino]

Hi,

Our current summer league has a handicap system. It has it's ups and downs. I'm currently giving 30 start (our system goes up in 5s). This is manageable against some players especially if they're giving 15-30 start themselves.

My last three matches though, the opponents have had the following handicaps:

Receive 20, 0 and 0. That means I started each game 45, 25 and 25 points down respectively as my handicap only went up from 25 to 30 this week.

The first match I only just won on the pink. The guy wasn't very good as a break builder but kept potting unbelievable long reds. Especially worrying as each one is worth a potential 8 points to me...indeed he scored first blood after I fouled off a safety 2nd visit and he got to 61-0 in front within minutes!

The second match: a new player to the league got a 25 start from me and then played as well as I can. I lost on the blue. I did my best but never got in front no matter how sensibly I played.

The third match: another new player got a 25 start from me and knocked a 38 break in straight away - including quite a few reds as there were a lot of low colours. I came to the table 63-0 down with about 7 reds left and the black and pink all tied up. I lost on the brown eventually.

So...mixed feelings from me. I'm currently at the top of the individual stats in my division but struggling hard relative to when my handicap was only 20 a month or so ago.

With our handicap system it also takes a long time for it to go down (I've voiced my opinion - looks like they'll be revising the finer points for next season). I could lose the next 12 frames and my handicap still wouldn't go down with the way it works at the moment.

I understand that I've been unlucky with the draw in the last 3 matches but it seems to keep happening. Out of all of the other team's players, I seem to get the one that has the highest skill to handicap ratio on the night???

[pottingpinks]

Sounds like the new players getting in lightly was the problem there rather than your own handicap?? That could be a problem for us this coming season as we've had a bit of a poster campaign to try and attract a few more clubs. Though to be honest a few players were registered during the season and played off scratch and it didnt prove too problematic. Maybe with unknown players perhaps the committee could have the authority to assess a handicap at any stage if it is thought they are "too well in".

[komakino]

Just scraped most wins (20 out of 28 = 71.43%). The good news is that percentage is just low enough for my handicap to stay at 30 for the next season. Don't fancy it going up any more yet! Still, it's been good practice I suppose. Every single frame this season I've started anywhere from 10 to 45 points behind. I've also managed to get decent breaks of 75 and 81 over the last fortnight or so. I hope this isn't just a purple patch.

[paul180]

so what would my handicap be,been playing for quite a few years on and off,highest break 50 but had loads of 30+ breaks??

[komakino]

Hard to say...our league bases a player's handicap on their ability to win frames and never on their break building.