#71  
Old 08-12-2020, 01:01 PM
ballgolfconvert ballgolfconvert is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Years Playing: 36.8
Courses Played: 2
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 336
Niced 165 Times in 102 Posts
Default

How does weather conditions play into this or does it reduce to not being very meaningful? A headwind vs a tailwind can change the characteristics of how a hole plays. So how many of these holes would have different rankings if let's just say the wind was blowing in the opposite direction?
Sponsored Links
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 08-12-2020, 02:13 PM
Steve West Steve West is offline
Par Delusionary
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Years Playing: 46.4
Courses Played: 426
Posts: 5,439
Niced 2,213 Times in 1,059 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ballgolfconvert View Post
How does weather conditions play into this or does it reduce to not being very meaningful? A headwind vs a tailwind can change the characteristics of how a hole plays. So how many of these holes would have different rankings if let's just say the wind was blowing in the opposite direction?
These show the performance of the hole. They are not a direct measure of any characteristic of a hole. Just like a player's score shows how they performed and is not a direct measure of how good a player they are.

How much difference it makes is unknowable.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 08-12-2020, 04:27 PM
nothinbuttree nothinbuttree is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: NE KY
Courses Played: 59
Posts: 199
Niced 146 Times in 89 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve West View Post
2020 DGPT - Idlewild Open presented by Dynamic Discs & The Nati/Idlewild/Idlewild Open 2020 MPO; 18 holes; Par 68; 9,194 ft. as a course came in at 70%%, or 44th percentile among all courses. Right between Toboggan and Brewster Ridge.

Hole 17 is the safest one to mess with.



This chart focuses on players rated 970-1020, the charts in the post above are based on all MPO players.
How are those hole lengths being measured?
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 08-12-2020, 05:51 PM
Steve West Steve West is offline
Par Delusionary
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Years Playing: 46.4
Courses Played: 426
Posts: 5,439
Niced 2,213 Times in 1,059 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nothinbuttree View Post
How are those hole lengths being measured?
Those in particular were from Udisc, but for another course. Just ignore them.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 08-12-2020, 06:08 PM
nothinbuttree nothinbuttree is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: NE KY
Courses Played: 59
Posts: 199
Niced 146 Times in 89 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve West View Post
Those in particular were from Udisc, but for another course. Just ignore them.
OK. I think it notable that the two par 5's are the highest--again as others have mentioned, possibly due simply to more spread. Even on a tough hole, a par 3, will not have as large a dispersion of scores as a par 5 will.

Also, I am not surprised 17 is not very predictive. Lots of things happen to otherwise very good drives there. I am not alone in that sentiment, nearly every commentator I have heard over the years mentions something along those lines...
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 10-12-2020, 08:59 AM
Billipo Billipo is online now
Par Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Ohio
Courses Played: 54
Posts: 228
Niced 27 Times in 16 Posts
Default Translating performance to par

Steve,

I found another document that you created which shows several ways to determine par based on player performance. Referencing 1000 rated players.

I strongly agree actual scores are the best way to determine par. Based on averages, median, spreads, etc. I also feel the posted should coincide with intended skill level when multiple layouts exists. IE: Blue use blue rating averages, white use white rating average, etc.

I know the original post is much more scholarly than my simple inquiry, but I'm interested a way to put numbers into practice.

I do have a question on average score numbers in your document. Par 3s up to 3.75 avg., Par 4s up to 4.95, and par 5s up to 6.05.

These seem high. I would think would be more like Par 3s up to 3.6avg., Par 4s up to 4.6, and par 5s up to 5.6.

Interested in thoughts.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 10-12-2020, 09:52 AM
Steve West Steve West is offline
Par Delusionary
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Years Playing: 46.4
Courses Played: 426
Posts: 5,439
Niced 2,213 Times in 1,059 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Billipo View Post
Steve,

I found another document that you created which shows several ways to determine par based on player performance. Referencing 1000 rated players.

I strongly agree actual scores are the best way to determine par. Based on averages, median, spreads, etc. I also feel the posted should coincide with intended skill level when multiple layouts exists. IE: Blue use blue rating averages, white use white rating average, etc.

I know the original post is much more scholarly than my simple inquiry, but I'm interested a way to put numbers into practice.

I do have a question on average score numbers in your document. Par 3s up to 3.75 avg., Par 4s up to 4.95, and par 5s up to 6.05.

These seem high. I would think would be more like Par 3s up to 3.6avg., Par 4s up to 4.6, and par 5s up to 5.6.

Interested in thoughts.
The difference between par and average is the extra throws caused by errors. (Technically, unmitigated errors: the net of the extra throws caused by errors minus the throws shaved by good luck.)

The higher the par, the more opportunities for errors. So, as par goes up, the difference between the average score and par increases. These particular values were the best fit of average score to the value generated by my preferred method: picking the lowest score for which at least 76.7% of throws were good enough to get par. See page 3 of http://www.stevewestdiscgolf.com/Sco...tionGraphs.pdf.

I don't much like using these average ranges. If you have the data to compute averages for 1000-rated players, you can use the better method. This method is just in there for the sake of the old stick-in-the-muds who cannot grasp that par is not average. These ranges are better than just rounding the average score to the nearest integer, but there will be a couple of holes per course where these ranges would not give the "correct" par.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 10-13-2020, 08:04 AM
Billipo Billipo is online now
Par Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Ohio
Courses Played: 54
Posts: 228
Niced 27 Times in 16 Posts
Default

Thanks for response.

Besides I depth analysis, I do believe there should be a simpler, easily applied, universally recognized way to determine par based on performance versus the pdga distance/ foliage colorful chart or reach green plus two.

A simple system may not be perfect, but better is always better. Especially if using real performance numbers. I forsee it more of a litmus test using distances, averages (skill appropriate players), score distribution, special circumstances (water,dogleg, judgement) as factors towards determining par. Ideally plug in scores (maybe current player rating), spits out proposed par.

Something universally understood for practical application by average Joe. Just my thought.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 10-13-2020, 08:38 AM
Ryan P.'s Avatar
Ryan P. Ryan P. is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Asheboro, NC
Years Playing: 14.6
Courses Played: 62
Posts: 1,867
Niced 154 Times in 92 Posts
Default

It'd help a lot if designers made and tested holes a bit before setting par. It's not easy, but creating a course and having people at the appropriate ratings come test it would really help.

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
 

  #80  
Old 10-13-2020, 08:46 AM
Cgkdisc's Avatar
Cgkdisc Cgkdisc is offline
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Years Playing: 31.6
Courses Played: 710
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 12,836
Niced 2,533 Times in 1,072 Posts
Default

Course design validation process. I would probably tweak this article based on some of the work Steve West has done but the basic idea of testing layouts for the skill level intended is still important, at least for courses used for tournament play.

Niced: (1)
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
USDGC Statistics Olorin Tournaments & Leagues 11 10-22-2014 04:19 PM
The PDGA & Statistics ChrisWoj Tournaments & Leagues 47 11-26-2013 07:50 AM
Post statistics say something? Technohic General Disc Golf Chat 19 10-07-2009 09:10 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:53 AM.


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