#41  
Old 05-14-2012, 01:19 PM
timg's Avatar
timg timg is online now
*Administrator*
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Years Playing: 11.9
Courses Played: 210
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 7,365
Perhaps New's formula is better for some courses and Dave's for others?
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 05-14-2012, 01:20 PM
timg's Avatar
timg timg is online now
*Administrator*
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Years Playing: 11.9
Courses Played: 210
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 7,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERicJ View Post
Tom Bass Regional Park - Wilmont Par 59, 7883'.
SSA typically ranges 55.5 - 56.0.
SSE was 57
Now showing 59.4, i.e. too high.
Probably a tweener course on the three level foliage scale, but would be 2 out of 5.

EDIT: FYI, "lightly wooded" changes to 53.6.
Tom Bass - Powell seems almost spot on

http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course.php?id=170
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 05-14-2012, 01:20 PM
jeverett's Avatar
jeverett jeverett is online now
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Eugene, OR
Years Playing: 4.9
Courses Played: 20
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 900
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERicJ View Post
Tom Bass Regional Park - Wilmont Par 59, 7883'.
SSA typically ranges 55.5 - 56.0.
SSE was 57
Now showing 59.4, i.e. too high.
Probably a tweener course on the three level foliage scale, but would be 2 out of 5.

EDIT: FYI, "lightly wooded" changes to 53.6.
Hi EricJ,

Hmm.. well, I can think of two possible fixes for that.. one might be an actual 5-option foliage scale (something that New013's method was designed to use, too), the other being adding the elevation (flat) adjustment that New013's method used into Dave242's method.. are 'flat' courses coming out too difficult now, on average? In new013's method, their SSE would be reduced by 0.5.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 05-14-2012, 01:25 PM
timg's Avatar
timg timg is online now
*Administrator*
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Years Playing: 11.9
Courses Played: 210
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 7,365
I've thrown in the adjustment for elevation.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 05-14-2012, 01:29 PM
ERicJ's Avatar
ERicJ ERicJ is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Years Playing: 6.4
Courses Played: 184
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 3,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by timg View Post
I've thrown in the adjustment for elevation.
That drops Tom Bass Regional Park - Wilmont to 58.9 SSE. A half stroke "better", but still about three strokes too high.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 05-14-2012, 01:31 PM
timg's Avatar
timg timg is online now
*Administrator*
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Years Playing: 11.9
Courses Played: 210
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 7,365
Well, it is an estimate after all It seems pretty darn close on a lot of courses that I checked. I did a search for "ssa" in course descriptions and did a quick compare. Most were within a couple of strokes which I felt was pretty decent.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 05-14-2012, 01:40 PM
Timko's Avatar
Timko Timko is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Kansas City
Years Playing: 11.1
Courses Played: 52
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 414
I'm actually quite interested in this new formula. Our club is going to implement ratings soon. Right now, I'm thinking we'll just use the formulas that are in the PDGA's spreadsheet of a couple of years ago. Are you using those, or did you derive all new formulas?
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 05-14-2012, 01:47 PM
DavidSauls's Avatar
DavidSauls DavidSauls is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newberry, SC
Years Playing: 18.8
Courses Played: 114
Posts: 6,765
Stoney Hill's is pretty close. Though we're tinking with overlapping layouts and didn't use the one shown in the Hole Info at this year's event, in previous years it's been around 59 for that layout. DGCR SSE shows 59.2.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 05-14-2012, 02:26 PM
joshmo65's Avatar
joshmo65 joshmo65 is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Pittsburgh
Years Playing: 7.1
Courses Played: 101
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 616
The two tournaments I most recently played in have the SSE quite a ways off...

As Chris mentioned, Moraine is off by about 5 strokes. The Ironwood had an SSE of between 66 and 68 for rounds 1 and 2 (artificially inflated due to rain) and right on 66 for round 3.

I also checked Jordan Creek where the People's Championship was held a few weeks back where the SSE came in at 52 to 53 for rounds 2 through 4 which is also off by about 5, just in the other direction. (Pros and adv played rounds 3 and 4 there while int and rec played there for rounds 1 and 2).

I am not sure why Morain's SSE is -5 and Jordan's is +5. Is there anyplace in the equations that take OB into account? We can only enter when there is water on a hole instead of whether there is general OB. I wonder if that would get the calculated SSE closer.
Reply With Quote
 
  

  #50  
Old 05-14-2012, 03:33 PM
jeverett's Avatar
jeverett jeverett is online now
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Eugene, OR
Years Playing: 4.9
Courses Played: 20
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 900
I think if we look at anomalous courses specifically, we *should* be able to engineer something that will better fit most of them..

For example, Moraine.. at 'moderately wooded', the SSE is too high, even with a little extra bump from the new 'flat elevation' modifier. At 'lightly wooded' the SSE is too low. This one definitely sounds like a candidate for a more descriptive system for documenting the course parameters.. and I think a lot of 'moderately wooded' courses may have the same problem: does moderately wooded mean open fairways, or tight fairways? Moraine, for example, looks like it has a few amazingly tight fairways on some holes, while others are pretty open except for dense trees lining the fairway. How about implementing some kind of scale with more options than just 'light', 'moderate', and 'heavy'? It would be pretty trivial to determine some new constants for any new categories.. which could then eventually be tweaked as needed.

As for Jordan, unfortunately artificial OB and forced layups are two things that the system absolutely is not going to be able to deal with well at all. Without some kind of calibrating system for specific courses, I don't think any generalized formula I could come up with is going to be accurate.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.