Disc Golf Course Review

Disc Golf Course Review (https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Disc Golf Chat (https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Everyone in disc golf has peaked. (https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/showthread.php?t=134561)

ChrisWoj 07-18-2019 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DiscFifty (Post 3473658)
Interesting op...perhaps the current generation has indeed peaked. But if you haven't already, start researching those young champ ams coming up, I'm guessing they're playing much better than young Paul did.

OP was a joke - but to be serious, you're right. I've been saying for years that Paul and Ricky were the faucet opening, the talent getting to where it's more than a drip. The faucet isn't done opening yet - the field is gonna be packed with guys at that 1050 level soon enough.

NOStheBOSS 07-18-2019 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisWoj (Post 3474179)
OP was a joke - but to be serious, you're right. I've been saying for years that Paul and Ricky were the faucet opening, the talent getting to where it's more than a drip. The faucet isn't done opening yet - the field is gonna be packed with guys at that 1050 level soon enough.

Since ratings are relative, I doubt it. Scores may get better but you will always only have those top 2 or 3 players that are good enough (or that much better than their competitors) to be above the 1050 level.

rocthecourse 07-18-2019 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisWoj (Post 3474179)
OP was a joke.


I thought it was a joke.

SD86 07-18-2019 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horsman (Post 3473077)
I would agree that Paul hasnt gotten better. I have always thought that the way the that ratings are calculated that over time ratings will continue to increase for the same scores thrown. Id predict 1100 rated players in the next 50 years

Quote:

Originally Posted by bwgort (Post 3473142)
Is there historical support for that claim? Do the same courses produce continually higher ratings year after year?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horsman (Post 3473146)
Not sure, im probably just pulling something out my end but I feel like thats where ratings are going. Totally opinion, did zero research.

I think Horsman is correct, and my precedent for it is tournament Chess. There has been ratings inflation and ratings creep for years, slowly but surely. Are today's players better than Bobby Fischer and Boris Spassky? Maybe, with the better tools they have to aid them. But in the overall, ratings are creeping up. It's kinda like economic inflation and its destructive value on currency over time.

So yes, I would agree that there is slow but very present 'inflation' in the ratings over time.

SD86 07-18-2019 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisWoj (Post 3474179)
OP was a joke - but to be serious, you're right. I've been saying for years that Paul and Ricky were the faucet opening, the talent getting to where it's more than a drip. The faucet isn't done opening yet - the field is gonna be packed with guys at that 1050 level soon enough.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NOStheBOSS (Post 3474186)
Since ratings are relative, I doubt it. Scores may get better but you will always only have those top 2 or 3 players that are good enough (or that much better than their competitors) to be above the 1050 level.

I was going to say that, as well. No matter how good 'the field' gets, there will always be a few super-elites at the very top. That's true in every sport, as well as tournament Chess, and it will be true of DG as well.

ChrisWoj 07-18-2019 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NOStheBOSS (Post 3474186)
Since ratings are relative, I doubt it. Scores may get better but you will always only have those top 2 or 3 players that are good enough (or that much better than their competitors) to be above the 1050 level.

I agree completely with that - but I think that what you're missing is that the talent level, related to both the athleticism of people in the game and the age at which those people start means that that particular subset of the population will get into the game, for a time, at a faster rate than before. While, I think (could be wrong) that growth is near an exponential line, I'm just saying I think the growth at the top end is turning upward a little sharper right now.

Ryan C 07-18-2019 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SD86 (Post 3474219)
I think Horsman is correct, and my precedent for it is tournament Chess. There has been ratings inflation and ratings creep for years, slowly but surely. Are today's players better than Bobby Fischer and Boris Spassky? Maybe, with the better tools they have to aid them. But in the overall, ratings are creeping up. It's kinda like economic inflation and its destructive value on currency over time.

So yes, I would agree that there is slow but very present 'inflation' in the ratings over time.

I'm a tournament chess player, and I'm not sure I agree. Bobby Fisher topped out at 2775 rated. The highest rated player ever is Magnus Carlson, who at his peak was 2884.

That is an increase of just 3.5% over a period of almost 50 years since Bobby Fisher achieved his highest rating. Considering how much technologyhas improved, I am 100% sure that Magnus is 3.5% stronger than Fisher was. Not that he was more naturally gifted, just that he is objectively 3.5% harder to beat. I think Chess is great case for how ratings actually DON'T inflate that much over time.

SD86 07-18-2019 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan C (Post 3474304)
I'm a tournament chess player, and I'm not sure I agree. Bobby Fisher topped out at 2775 rated. The highest rated player ever is Magnus Carlson, who at his peak was 2884.

That is an increase of just 3.5% over a period of almost 50 years since Bobby Fisher achieved his highest rating. Considering how much technologyhas improved, I am 100% sure that Magnus is 3.5% stronger than Fisher was. Not that he was more naturally gifted, just that he is objectively 3.5% harder to beat. I think Chess is great case for how ratings actually DON'T inflate that much over time.

You're partly right, but IIRC Fischer was all alone at his rating in 1972 when he won the World title. Spassky was a good bit lower, as were their peers. I'll have to look up their ratings at that time, but the average GM rating was lower than it (the average) is today. And that's where the ratings creep has occurred, moreso than the top few players ever.

Anyhoo, I do think there will be ratings creep in DG over time. Slowly, but surely...

Cgkdisc 07-18-2019 02:25 PM

Unfortunately, the ability to compare ratings back in history was disrupted as the number of tour courses with punitive OB increased. These courses artificially inflate not only the top end ratings but everyone in the event without additional skill being demonstrated. It's likely that after taking out the OB effect, McBeth would still have a higher rating than Climo at his peak but probably not as much as currently displayed, with his forehand skill likely being the relevant difference.

Ryan C 07-18-2019 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SD86 (Post 3474318)
You're partly right, but IIRC Fischer was all alone at his rating in 1972 when he won the World title. Spassky was a good bit lower, as were their peers. I'll have to look up their ratings at that time, but the average GM rating was lower than it (the average) is today. And that's where the ratings creep has occurred, moreso than the top few players ever.

Anyhoo, I do think there will be ratings creep in DG over time. Slowly, but surely...

Maybe, but it is difficult to argue that higher ratings are due to rating creep, and not to players simply getting better. I think in disc golf what we are seeing is certainly the latter.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:15 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.