#81  
Old 09-09-2020, 01:32 PM
DiscFifty DiscFifty is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Years Playing: 9.6
Courses Played: 19
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 4,269
Niced 1,575 Times in 883 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanJon View Post
It appears that you don't understand how ratings work.
I can only try to understand the ratings themselves. And they clearly show this...

The higher rated avg player in a division will result in higher rated rounds. Which speaks for itself in regards to the bubbling up of ratings over the years.
Sponsored Links
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 09-09-2020, 02:49 PM
Steve West Steve West is offline
Par Delusionary
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Years Playing: 46.4
Courses Played: 426
Posts: 5,452
Niced 2,221 Times in 1,065 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DiscFifty View Post
I can only try to understand the ratings themselves. And they clearly show this...

The higher rated avg player in a division will result in higher rated rounds. Which speaks for itself in regards to the bubbling up of ratings over the years.
So higher rated players get higher rated rounds.

[SARCASM]Ratings inflation is proven![/SARCASM]

Unless it's because of extra-terrestrials.

Niced: (3)
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 09-09-2020, 03:12 PM
Discette's Avatar
Discette Discette is offline
Independent Operator*
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Years Playing: 24.2
Courses Played: 533
Posts: 1,962
Niced 991 Times in 351 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve West View Post
So higher rated players get higher rated rounds.

[SARCASM]Ratings inflation is proven![/SARCASM]

Unless it's because of extra-terrestrials.
You mean

Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 09-09-2020, 03:41 PM
DiscFifty DiscFifty is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Years Playing: 9.6
Courses Played: 19
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 4,269
Niced 1,575 Times in 883 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve West View Post
So higher rated players get higher rated rounds.

[SARCASM]Ratings inflation is proven![/SARCASM]

Unless it's because of extra-terrestrials.
Aliens? nah... but with a rating algorithm that knows no limits, how can there not be ratings inflation over the years? I'm guessing the original thought process was that MPO would rarely be rated among themselves. It would be interesting to go back to Climo's stats and see how many of his tournaments (when playing in MPO) were rated separately from other divisions. I looked at a few in 2003 and the same score/round/rating was the same for all divisions.

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 09-09-2020, 05:25 PM
Steve West Steve West is offline
Par Delusionary
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Years Playing: 46.4
Courses Played: 426
Posts: 5,452
Niced 2,221 Times in 1,065 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DiscFifty View Post
Aliens? nah... but with a rating algorithm that knows no limits, how can there not be ratings inflation over the years? I'm guessing the original thought process was that MPO would rarely be rated among themselves. It would be interesting to go back to Climo's stats and see how many of his tournaments (when playing in MPO) were rated separately from other divisions. I looked at a few in 2003 and the same score/round/rating was the same for all divisions.
It seems quite plausible that ratings would drift in relation to underlying skill (if there actually is such a thing in the face of changing disc technologies, player pool, training methods, and course design).

I just like to shoot down false evidence. Only by seeing real drift can we stop it or correct for any drift that has happened so far.

Niced: (2)
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 09-09-2020, 07:48 PM
Nick Pacific's Avatar
Nick Pacific Nick Pacific is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 333
Niced 400 Times in 181 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DiscFifty View Post
Aliens? nah... but with a rating algorithm that knows no limits, how can there not be ratings inflation over the years? I'm guessing the original thought process was that MPO would rarely be rated among themselves. It would be interesting to go back to Climo's stats and see how many of his tournaments (when playing in MPO) were rated separately from other divisions. I looked at a few in 2003 and the same score/round/rating was the same for all divisions.
Agreed. I suspect the ratings have been inflated by about 10 points in the last 20 or so years. Which would put Climo in the low 1050s for his hey day which seems about right. When you look at the players from the decade of the 2000s and add about 10 or so points to their ratings things start to add up more accurately in comparison to today.

I think you're spot on in that the recent separating of the top MPO field from the ams and FPO is partially/mostly responsible for this.

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 09-10-2020, 08:42 AM
Nick Pacific's Avatar
Nick Pacific Nick Pacific is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 333
Niced 400 Times in 181 Posts
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by DiscFifty View Post
I'm guessing the original thought process was that MPO would rarely be rated among themselves.
I think this is ultimately the smoking gun of what's going on. Without the lower rated fields to keep ratings from drifting higher and higher each year, we've slowly seen the ratings inflate by about 10 points from 20 years ago, with most of that inflation going on over the last 7 or so years when the PRO/AM fields were more often separated, the FPO was given their own layout, and the top tier MPO players (>1030) started playing the exclusive events.

Back in the 2000s more often than not you'd have a Val Jenkins and/or Juliana Korver randomly shoot a hot round that's cashable in MPO, or some local 960 rated pro who played the layout a million times shoot lights out at the event and really throw a monkey wrench into the round ratings and drag them down.

I know the PDGA at this point are invested in the ratings system and are probably hesitant to start monkeying around with it. Sunk costs are real yo. Just spitballing ideas here, but you've got my spidey sense tingling.

I'm actually a fan of the ratings system BTW, and I think it accurately reflects the player abilities of today. It's pretty cool and makes our unique sport even more unique. I think the one flaw as you pointed out is using it to compare players over time. Ultimately every system will have weak points and isn't perfect.

Niced: (1)

Last edited by Nick Pacific; 09-10-2020 at 08:47 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 09-10-2020, 09:41 AM
ToddL ToddL is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Greenville, SC
Years Playing: 24.4
Courses Played: 154
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 1,210
Niced 638 Times in 287 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DiscFifty View Post
The higher rated avg player in a division will result in higher rated rounds. Which speaks for itself in regards to the bubbling up of ratings over the years.
Go test it. There's lots of tournament results you can look at.
Average the player ratings of the players who competed in a round. Average their round ratings. Remove and DNFs and non-propagators. Compare the two numbers and show that the MPO field is drifting upward.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 09-10-2020, 12:03 PM
tbonesocrul tbonesocrul is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Courses Played: 118
Posts: 137
Niced 68 Times in 40 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick Pacific View Post
I think this is ultimately the smoking gun of what's going on. Without the lower rated fields to keep ratings from drifting higher and higher each year, we've slowly seen the ratings inflate by about 10 points from 20 years ago, with most of that inflation going on over the last 7 or so years when the PRO/AM fields were more often separated, the FPO was given their own layout, and the top tier MPO players (>1030) started playing the exclusive events.
I'm not saying ratings don't drift, but I would like to see some sort of analysis that shows the magnitude of possible drift over the years. I think to really have a strong argument you would need to show for a fixed course over many years the same score results in a trend of increasing ratings. It is hard to find a fixed course because trees grow & fall, and at the touring pro level the courses are constantly being tweaked. Similarly weather conditions might be radically different in some years further obfuscating any trends.

So I want to describe other mechanics that could also contribute to a rise in the rating of the top N pros.

The total number of disc golf players competing in the PDGA system has seen a huge rise in the past decade. Check out the demographics from PDGA's website: PDGA Demographics

From:
  • 2002 - 7638
  • 2003 - 8304
  • 2007 - 11943
  • 2011 - 16609
  • 2015 - 30454
  • 2019 - 53366
That is a huge increase in the the size of the field so it seems reasonable that the top N pros have higher ratings now.

In this awesome discussion of the PDGA rating system (Nick & Matt show with Chuck Kennedy) around the 25:30 mark Chuck describes the origin of the ratings. 1000 Rated SSA was set from the average of the 100 Best Rounds at the 1998 Cinncinati Pro Worlds. These Course ratings were used to generate player ratings. Everything propagates from this event. If a similar event were held with the players and discs from today, would we expect the 100 best rounds to average better or worse than the top 100 rounds from 1998?

Later in the show, around 1:07:25, they discuss ratings creep and Chuck shares his thoughts. Chuck attributes the majority of the rise in ratings to the fact that modern courses are being made harder through a variety of methods like increased distance and OB zones.

The PDGA rating is a measure of the players past performances on the courses they have played. There is an upper limit to your rating and that limit is the difficulty of the courses you have played. You can always find ways to make a course harder for the general population of disc golfers. But if a player's total throws don't change as the course is made harder he is showing that his rated rounds (at that course) were limited by the ability of the course to properly rate/evaluate his skill.

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
 

  #90  
Old 10-13-2020, 12:39 PM
aredoubles aredoubles is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Years Playing: 4.3
Courses Played: 164
Posts: 188
Niced 213 Times in 92 Posts
Default

1040 club
+ Marvin Tetzel

1050 club
+ Calvin Heimburg

Niced: (2)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help understanding player ratings SilentExodus04 General Disc Golf Chat 53 07-16-2018 05:47 PM
player ratings? coachgallant60 Newbie Intros and Q&A 6 01-17-2018 02:58 AM
Player Ratings.. mikk General Disc Golf Chat 14 04-30-2012 08:07 AM
Player Ratings Riley General Disc Golf Chat 14 10-12-2009 09:33 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.