View Single Post
  #49  
Old 05-01-2013, 11:34 AM
jeverett's Avatar
jeverett jeverett is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Eugene, OR
Years Playing: 5.2
Courses Played: 20
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 966
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1978 View Post
Can you explain the 2 tournaments played 2 weeks apart, same exact layout and conditions, basically. Am vs pro

Azalea Am
R1-R4 Score of 60
Average player rating 895, average propigator rating 904
977 980 974 982 (average for a 60, 978)

Azalea Open
R1-R4 Score of 60
Average player rating 963, average propigator rating 963
989 988 994 993 (average for a 60, 991) (13 pts higher)

How is this not mostly because of the higher rated players in the open tournament padding the ratings of the rounds.
Hi 1978,

Hmm.. do you happen to have the initial ratings of all propagators/players as well as their scores for each round? Without actually graphing it all, it's tough to really see what was happening with ratings/round scores. I watched footage of that event, and the course looked like it had a fair number of really short but really technical holes, and then some longer (but still really technical) holes too. Given the better angular accuracy of gold-level players, I admit that particular 13-point gap looks odd. If anything, I'd expect it to be in the other direction (the Open field 60 would rate lower). How many players were in each event, by the way? If you can get me initial ratings and round scores, I'd be happy to make some charts and run the regression.. it may help explain it.

Edit: running a Pearson Correlation Coefficient for the rounds may prove interesting, too. Heavily wooded courses tend to have low(er) correlation coefficients (the predictive value of initial player rating vs event score).. i.e. they tend to induce a lot more randomness into round scores than less wooded courses).

Last edited by jeverett; 05-01-2013 at 11:38 AM.
Reply With Quote