PDGA rating for everyone

[ViolaBouquet]

I think everyone needs a rating through PDGA. If you become a member you get the $10 discount at tournaments, but everyones ratings are calculated, and saved. This would eliminate almost all bagging. What do you think?

 

[Cgkdisc]

Yay!

 

[DavidSauls]

Are you saying everyone who plays in tournaments should be a PDGA member, or that non-members should also have ratings?

 

[Halcón]

This is how it always should have been.

If you're new, you pay the 10 bucks and get a rating. You might be able to bag your first tourney, but for every one thereafter you'd be placed in your proper slot.

Of course, this does nothing to discourage people who actually play worse than they can on purpose...which is another can of worms altogether.

 

[Schleppy]

Makes sense to me.

 

[tripp]

I think they do track/keep non-member ratings but you have to pay up to find yours out. Perhaps they could just make them available to TD's.

 

[ViolaBouquet]

I've heard of people playing bad to lower their rating, but that just seems like a waste of money, and time.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Non-member minimum allowed divisions are provided to TDs to help them place those (anti-bagging) without published ratings.

Very few players know how to play just bad enough to lower their rating. If you play too poorly, the round rating is too low to be included in your rating and lower it. As you point out, there's no payoff to spend the entry fee money in several events to drop your rating because it would cost more than you can win playing in a lower division.

 

[tripp]

Non-member minimum allowed divisions are provided to TDs to help them place those (anti-bagging) without published ratings.

Very few players know how to play just bad enough to lower their rating. If you play too poorly, the round rating is too low to be included in your rating and lower it. As you point out, there's no payoff to spend the entry fee money in several events to drop your rating because it would cost more than you can win playing in a lower division.

Lower divisions generally don't payout cash either.

 

[mndiscg]

You are able to see your round ratings even if you aren't a PDGA member. It wouldn't be too hard to guesstimate on your overall ranking. For me, I don't think it is worth the money. I play less than a tournament a year on average and am honest if not overambitious on assigning myself to a group.

 

[cjskier]

So your saying the pdga should calculate everyones rating, for free? Give them enough $$$ to pay some more people to do it, then they MIGHT consider it, lol.

 

[crashzero]

the rating system is pretty solid

one problem - if a player needs to DNF, it hurts the other players. this is a flaw in the system. it should have no effect on others ratings

 

[Cgkdisc]

A DNF does not affect others ratings. If a player is already playing poorly, their round would not be used to generate ratings whether they DNF or not.

 

[ViolaBouquet]

So your saying the pdga should calculate everyones rating, for free? Give them enough $$$ to pay some more people to do it, then they MIGHT consider it, lol.

1. They already do calculate everyones rating
2. If you are not a member you pay an extra $10 at tournaments anyway.

 

[Todd Wiley]

I think everyone needs a rating through PDGA. If you become a member you get the $10 discount at tournaments, but everyones ratings are calculated, and saved. This would eliminate almost all bagging. What do you think?

After looking at the scores for the recent Michigan State Championships.... I completely agree that even non-members need to have a rating. Bagging looked obvious in the Rec division.

 

[crashzero]

A DNF does not affect others ratings. If a player is already playing poorly, their round would not be used to generate ratings whether they DNF or not.

Interesting. I quit a 2 round event during the 2nd round and I was told, had I finished, everyone elses ratings would have been 6-8 points higher (open division)

 

[Cgkdisc]

That may have been true only if you posted a score with a rating better than 60 points below your rating. Your score in the first round would still be used in the rating calculation if it was rated more than 60 points below your rating.

 

[crashzero]

That may have been true only if you posted a score with a rating better than 60 points below your rating. Your score in the first round would still be used in the rating calculation if it was rated more than 60 points below your rating.

Yes, my first round was near my rating, I wasnt trying to trash my round.

So if someone plays fine the first round, then has to DNF the second for whatever reason, it hurts the other players?

 

[Cgkdisc]

DNFing in the second round works as if you never signed up for that round in the first place. No one knows whether you would have shot a good round or poor round. So it's unknown whether your presence would have helped or hurt the ratings. The only way you slightly hurt the process is if there already are few propagators (less than 5) playing the event. So losing one more slightly increases the chances for wider variances in ratings that round.

 

[MrHighlandPark]

I thought you needed 5 propagators for the round to be rated at all. If my lower division has a unique layout and only 3 or 4 propagators, will my round be rated?