#1391  
Old 09-08-2020, 04:06 PM
Billyray Billyray is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: St Charles, IL
Years Playing: 17.5
Courses Played: 49
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 124
Niced 146 Times in 52 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ballgolfconvert View Post
None of those were bad putting weeks. All winners in top 20% except for Dustin Johnson who started with a big advantage over the field at -10.
61st place is not top 20%. Im going to go shove my head in an oven now.

I just scored a sweet Philo Glow Star Destroyer to complete my all pink glow bag for $20. Glad I was online wasting my life away at the time.
Sponsored Links

Niced: (1)

Last edited by Billyray; 09-08-2020 at 04:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1392  
Old 09-08-2020, 05:08 PM
oldmandiscer oldmandiscer is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 799
Niced 146 Times in 101 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ballgolfconvert View Post
None of those were bad putting weeks. All winners in top 20% except for Dustin Johnson who started with a big advantage over the field at -10.
That's right, I forgot that even Dustin had the 10 shot advantage. Even still he was just below avg in putting. All others were above avg.
Reply With Quote
  #1393  
Old 09-08-2020, 05:10 PM
oldmandiscer oldmandiscer is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 799
Niced 146 Times in 101 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
Yes I'd agree that whoever consistently puts it closer to the hole/basket in the least amount of shots will score better. <face palm>

The goalposts are just constantly moving. You say you have to be hot with the putter to win, i show a guy winning the damn Tour Championship with average/below average putting and now it's the bottom 10% only makes a difference.

Well if only 12-13 players out of 125 are putting bad then how is it an important stat? What the **** are we talking about here. If you want putting to statistically start showing up in scoring differences, you need to extend the circle out and make all putts 66' in. I think scores won't change but the stats will and "putting" % goes down.

A 30' putt for a pro is not going to see a significant enough statistical variance to make it worth retrofitting courses. No one shows clutch 40' putts to win the tournament on Sportscenter. They show Paul McBeth acing from 400' out which will almost never happen with a smaller basket.
Why don't you want to do the disc golf putting stats? Because someone already did them. And guess what, it didn't matter at all if you were high during the week in putting. Little to no correlation.

However in every instance in ball golf the player who won was in the top half, minus DJ who had a ten shot advantage.

Yes I may have overstated the putting on the PGA Tour still. It's not the number one important stat, but then you can't be low in it either. You need to have an all around game.
Reply With Quote
  #1394  
Old 09-08-2020, 05:38 PM
txmxer txmxer is online now
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Texas
Years Playing: 0.7
Courses Played: 2
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 392
Niced 310 Times in 148 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve West View Post
That is not what the data shows. In fact, it's just the opposite. Here is the summary.

"We find this not to be the case.

On the long course, the Marksmen added 5.2 throws to a 1000-rated player, added 2.5 throws to a 916 rated player, and zero throws to an 839 rated player.

For the short course, the Marksmen added 2.5 throws to a 1000-rated round, zero throws to a 916-rated round, and subtracted 2.2 throws from an 839 rated round."

The results you describe would make any one that knows anything about statistics question the validity of the statistics.

More challenging baskets should never have a negative result. Zero is suspicious but not impossible.

At a minimum you need a much larger basis so you don’t have illogical results.
Reply With Quote
  #1395  
Old 09-08-2020, 05:44 PM
Billyray Billyray is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: St Charles, IL
Years Playing: 17.5
Courses Played: 49
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 124
Niced 146 Times in 52 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldmandiscer View Post
Why don't you want to do the disc golf putting stats? Because someone already did them. And guess what, it didn't matter at all if you were high during the week in putting. Little to no correlation.

However in every instance in ball golf the player who won was in the top half, minus DJ who had a ten shot advantage.

Yes I may have overstated the putting on the PGA Tour still. It's not the number one important stat, but then you can't be low in it either. You need to have an all around game.

You asked for it:

Memorial - Calvin Heimburg c1x 25th
Waco - Colton Montgomery c1x 1st
Dynamic Discs Open - Paul McBeth c1x 10th
Silver Cup - Ricky Wysocki c1x 6th
Preserve - Nikko Locarno c1x 5th
GLO - Eagle McMahon. C1x 7th
Idlewild - Eagle McMahon. C1x 4th
Ledgestone - Ricky Wysocki c1x 3rd
Green Mountain - Kevin Jones. C1x 3rd

Hmmmm seems like if you aren't top 10 putter you aren't winning much this year.

Edit - I've now disproven your stats on basicly every point you have made. Clearly putting in disc golf is important because all the pro winners finish top 10 with 1 exception which can be statistical variance.


Last edited by Billyray; 09-08-2020 at 05:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1396  
Old 09-08-2020, 05:47 PM
Ryan C Ryan C is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Courses Played: 1
Posts: 265
Niced 85 Times in 50 Posts
Default

This thread is too long for me to read the whole thing, but something I didn't see much of in the first 10 or 15 pages was the importance of course design.

I don't think making a putt inside 33 ft. should be THAT difficult. We need better hole design that makes parking holes a real accomplishment. We want scrambling and long birdie runs to be the rule, not the exception. We just have far too many easy courses. We need to continue to develop new courses for our big pro-level events that will create good scoring separation among the best players. Making the baskets smaller doesn't solve this.

It is MUCH better to watch a borderline putt stick, than to watch a good putt spit out. Smaller baskets will perhaps eliminate some of the borderline putts, but the tradeoff will be bad for the sport.

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #1397  
Old 09-08-2020, 06:29 PM
rocthecourse's Avatar
rocthecourse rocthecourse is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WI (near Il border)
Years Playing: 13.7
Courses Played: 105
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 2,342
Niced 460 Times in 218 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txmxer View Post
More challenging baskets should never have a negative result. Zero is suspicious but not impossible.
A smaller basket can have a negative result for low rated players. Low rated players can easily 3-4-5 putt from inside the circle, if a smaller basket scares them enough to lay up it can lower their score. Low rated players who run stuff in the 40-80 foot range are likely to miss often leaving them with a putt they can't make, but if the basket scares them enough to lay up it can lower their score.


*If a player can score better on a smaller basket that means they are probably making bad decisions on when to run the basket and when to lay up when playing on regular sized baskets.
Reply With Quote
  #1398  
Old 09-08-2020, 06:39 PM
oldmandiscer oldmandiscer is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 799
Niced 146 Times in 101 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
You asked for it:

Memorial - Calvin Heimburg c1x 25th
Waco - Colton Montgomery c1x 1st
Dynamic Discs Open - Paul McBeth c1x 10th
Silver Cup - Ricky Wysocki c1x 6th
Preserve - Nikko Locarno c1x 5th
GLO - Eagle McMahon. C1x 7th
Idlewild - Eagle McMahon. C1x 4th
Ledgestone - Ricky Wysocki c1x 3rd
Green Mountain - Kevin Jones. C1x 3rd

Hmmmm seems like if you aren't top 10 putter you aren't winning much this year.

Edit - I've now disproven your stats on basicly every point you have made. Clearly putting in disc golf is important because all the pro winners finish top 10 with 1 exception which can be statistical variance.
I guess we only have 10 good players too lol. What about C2 in regulation?

Vegas - Sexton - 5th (14th in C1X)
Memorial - Calvin - 1st (25th in C1X)
Waco- Colten - tie 3rd - (1st in C1X) 100% putting lol
DDO - McBeth - 2nd - (10th in C1X)
Silver Cup - Ricky - 1st (6th in C1X)
Preserve- Nikko - tie 2nd (5th in C1X)
GLO- Eagle - tie-1st - (7th in C1X)
Idlewild- Eagle - 1st - (4th in C1x)
Ledgestone- Ricky - 1st - (3rd in c1X)
GMC - KJ - 4th - (3rd in c1X)

C2 in regulation for the winner avg = 2.1

C1X percentage for the winner = 7.8

2.1 (long game) versus 7.8 (putting)
Reply With Quote
  #1399  
Old 09-08-2020, 06:47 PM
oldmandiscer oldmandiscer is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 799
Niced 146 Times in 101 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan C View Post
This thread is too long for me to read the whole thing, but something I didn't see much of in the first 10 or 15 pages was the importance of course design.

I don't think making a putt inside 33 ft. should be THAT difficult. We need better hole design that makes parking holes a real accomplishment. We want scrambling and long birdie runs to be the rule, not the exception. We just have far too many easy courses. We need to continue to develop new courses for our big pro-level events that will create good scoring separation among the best players. Making the baskets smaller doesn't solve this.

It is MUCH better to watch a borderline putt stick, than to watch a good putt spit out. Smaller baskets will perhaps eliminate some of the borderline putts, but the tradeoff will be bad for the sport.
It would be nice, but the truth is that most land where courses are like in city parks. It's usually smallish and wider open. You just cannot create a challenging course without making the target smaller. Then we have the other side where some good land is available but on a budget they don't hire a real good course designer. So we have some silly design tricked up course. A smaller basket could create more of a challenge and effective make these places have better courses.

If the designer knows putting is more difficult he's not going to put it on a mound or severe slope for instance or we better cut a real fairway here so it's possible to birdie without blind luck.
Reply With Quote
 

  #1400  
Old 09-08-2020, 06:57 PM
Steve West Steve West is offline
Par Delusionary
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Years Playing: 46.4
Courses Played: 426
Posts: 5,455
Niced 2,223 Times in 1,067 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txmxer View Post
The results you describe would make any one that knows anything about statistics question the validity of the statistics.

More challenging baskets should never have a negative result. Zero is suspicious but not impossible.

At a minimum you need a much larger basis so you don’t have illogical results.
Read carefully. The study did not conclude that putting was easier for anyone. It showed that some players can get lower scores on smaller baskets.

There are other reasons (besides easier putting) why a smaller basket could result in better scores for worse players. For example, maybe all players were more likely to lay up from distances where they shouldn't be running the basket. For the worst players, that could sometimes result in just two more throws (lay-up + made putt) instead of three more (air-ball + missed come-backer + made putt). Lower score.

Then again, I think I can putt better on a smaller basket (the outer chains on Innovas tend to shove my soft putts away), so maybe that's the reason for the observed results.

This study can't determine the reasons for the lower scores or the compression between the best and worst players. But, it does show that the most likely thing that will happen is that scores will be compressed between the best players and everyone else. I don't know if that's a pro or a con for smaller baskets.

I would like to see a much larger test. If anyone is in a position to make money off the introduction of smaller baskets, maybe we'll see one. But, this one was large enough that we can be pretty confident that a larger study will be unlikely to show better players getting more advantage from smaller baskets.
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
smaller greens? mhulkman Course Design 103 08-22-2020 07:13 PM
Smaller basket name? AzteC Other Gear 6 08-07-2014 11:56 PM
HELP! i need to make my apartment quieter with basket elmexdela Other Gear 20 01-09-2014 10:42 AM
PGA Pros/Clubs coversion to PDGA Pros/Plastic MurderMike41370 General Disc Golf Chat 36 01-22-2013 12:28 PM
Make some offers! Need to get rid of to make room!!! bretttallen The Marketplace 10 08-26-2010 11:18 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:37 PM.


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