#61  
Old 08-18-2017, 07:36 AM
New013's Avatar
New013 New013 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Raleigh, NC
Years Playing: 11
Courses Played: 176
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 7,154
Niced 167 Times in 86 Posts
Send a message via AIM to New013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doofenshmirtz View Post
Interesting tactics . . . I know facts are hard things to understand, let alone master, and you have illustrated why the failure to understand what you are doing can lead to false confidence that your formula, rooted in the misunderstanding, can lead to a false sense of righteousness. As you might imagine, I suspect that your righteousness is somewhat less than genuine.

You are using a mean based formula to putatively describe "super high quality." For example, if an area has three different 5.0 rated courses and three different 2.0 rated courses, it's average is going to be 3.5 (73.5 score). If another area has 6 3.75 rated courses, it will have a higher average and higher score (84.35) under your method. While it is debatable which area has the best disc golf courses, on average, there is little question which area has the most "super high quality" disc golf courses.

Claiming that a 2.5 rating courses aren't a part of your score is perhaps the most blatant indicator that maybe math is a little bit harder than you might have imagined. Every course is part of the course number multiplier (sum) no matter how bad it is. Squaring the average appears to do nothing more than inflate the totals to provide the appearance of separation. Eliminating the need to square the average would result in the same ranking albeit with different scores.

Sum and distance have nothing to do with quality. That's 2/3 of what you claim your formula to be (leaving out the apparently arbitrary assignment of overlapping courses to one area or another, also not quality related). The other third is an average with a meaningless exponent. An average that includes, just like the multiplier, every bad course, every mediocre course and every good one, and, yes, every 2.5 rated one - not just "super high quality" ones. Your formula doesn't describe a ranking of "super high quality" disc golf. It only identifies what area has the highest average ranking times the most courses not shared with another area unless its the area you want the claim the shared one.

Whatever your motives for creating your formula, they don't appear to be what you say they are any more than you formula describes what you claim it does. If you want to fix the formula, then start by only counting courses with a minimum rating that you think makes up the lowest rating for "super high quality." And get rid of the square, it does nothing but add a meaningless step that doesn't change the ranking.
You may think my math skills are bad but I promise you that your reading skills are worst.

The only courses used in this were those with a rating of 3 or higher. There are ZERO courses in any part of this with a rating less than 3. So that thing you suggested I do is actually exactly what my sister did with the original formula.

There IS a baseline. As I already pointed out multiple times to you but here I am pointing it out again.

Also only 18 hole courses were used so your 9 hole comment also sounds like gibberish. You're one of those I read the headline but none of the article but I know all about it geniuses.

Now let's talk about math. If you look at just the sum and have an area with three courses rated 3 (the baseline) and another with two courses rated 4 and 5 the sum alone says these are equal but clearly the second one has more quality while the previous has more quantity.

By adding in the average of qualifying courses (those rated higher than 3 and having at least 18 holes) you hash out which has more quality. Now the first area has a score of 9 3 = 27. While the latter has 9 4.5 = 40.5. Now the area with more quality is ranked higher.

But squaring does nothing you say....

Now let's say there is an area with four courses all 3.25, then the original latter area with a 5 and a 4.

The sum of the first is 13 with an average of 3.25. If you just multiply you get 13 3.25 = 42.25. This would rank the area with more but less quality courses above the other area with a score of just 40.25.

Now square the averages. 13 10.5265 = 137.3125.

9 20.25 = 182.25

By squaring the average the area with less but higher quality jumps the area with twice as many courses but less quality.

Now explain to me how squaring does absolutely nothing to the ranking. Explain to me how all these bad 2.5 courses are screwing up the ranking. I'll pop my popcorn.
Sponsored Links

Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 08-18-2017, 08:16 AM
New013's Avatar
New013 New013 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Raleigh, NC
Years Playing: 11
Courses Played: 176
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 7,154
Niced 167 Times in 86 Posts
Send a message via AIM to New013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BogeyNoMore View Post
Do you still live in Fu**** Va*ina?

Fuquay Varina

No I moved to Cary, land of the snobs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve West View Post
The first step in making a statistic is defining the question you are trying to answer. I don't mean specifying the formula, but what actions will be affected by the answer?
I think it's pretty clear that the original question she was asking is "What is the best place to live (the X) if you wanted to have a high quantity of high quality disc golf courses within a certain distance?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve West View Post
If you skip that step, everyone can point out that you are wrong. When you include that step, it tells you how to pick preferences and all the other aspects of the statistic.
I don't believe that step was skipped. I feel like I explained it pretty well that this is #1 a statistic created by a person who does not and never has played disc golf and #2 is a preference based statistic that not all would agree with and #3 not the best way to do it if you wanted to really get in to it.

There are a lot more factors you can bring in if you wanted a more definitive list I've admitted that. However if your question is, "Hey where's the best spots that have quality courses within reasonable daily driving distance?", I believe this stat answers it pretty well. I think most people would agree to that.

Beyond that I think you're wanting more out of this than what was intended or what I ever made it out to be. It's just a list that gives you an idea of where things stand as of now and how they've changed since the original list. Any of the places in the Top 25 is a solid place to hit if you're traveling or wanting to live and have quality disc golf around you. A quick reference guide if you will.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve West View Post
I was finding the place with the best courses, I'd probably think of it as the place where a player living there would play some function of more rounds at the higher rated courses. I'm not sure how I would balance more vs. higher rated. Which means I would need to go back and better define why I'm finding the place with the best courses.
Yeah but in the end that would also be based mostly on what your personal preferences are. How can you determine what any said person would do or what they would want to do if they were in that position. Some people tend not to like playing epic 5 star courses a lot because they tend to be long and more difficult, a lot of people would prefer that. You'd have to literally monitor traffic at courses to factor that in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve West View Post
I were finding the best place to visit for a course-poaching vacation, I would not be looking at an area, but a "string" of courses that could all be hit with a minimum of travel from course to course. For a huge example, driving all of I-35 might be a better trip than visiting WI.
Again, that's a preference. If I was doing a nothing but driving from here to there and asking myself "What great courses can I hit on the way?" then yes that's a good stat to create.

The biggest roadtrip I've done for disc golf was not really done that way. We were more thinking each day is an area so what are the best courses we can hit in that area within the period of one day. Then when it got dark we drove to the next area. We hit groupings not strings.

You also have the people who are not just factoring in disc golf to their vacation plans. For some disc golf is just another thing on their agenda not the agenda. If I'm going on vacation and my options are narrowed down to Orlando, Portland or Cincinnati based on other factors, then I want to get an idea of which of the three would also give me a chance to play some great courses this list would help with that decision as a quick reference. You could cross off Orlando (not Orland Park) and dive deeper in to Portland and Cincy.

Last edited by New013; 08-18-2017 at 08:20 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 08-18-2017, 09:20 AM
Lazerface Lazerface is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: St. Louis, MO
Courses Played: 5
Posts: 859
Niced 523 Times in 249 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpikeHyzer View Post
The Texas rankings should have an asterisk next to them. People from Texas always think their stuff is better. I mean...people who say Whataburger has the best burgers in the world are using a way different scale for rating things ;-)
My corporate office is in TX and if I hear one more idiot tell me how good Whataburger is.......

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 08-18-2017, 09:33 AM
bhadella bhadella is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charlotte, NC
Years Playing: 23
Courses Played: 171
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 3,168
Niced 159 Times in 104 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazerface View Post
My corporate office is in TX and if I hear one more idiot tell me how good Whataburger is.......
The TX fluffing is real. Thankfully there was and In and Out so I was able to get a mighty fine burger in TX.

Bear Creek that I played on Wednesday in DFW (3.62 rated) isn't in the ballpark of courses lower rated in the Charlotte area (Sugaw at 3.24, Goat Island at 3.29, Rankin 3.42, Eastway 3.47, Kilborne 3.53, Reedy Creek 3.55, Stumpy Creek 3.58 and Winget 3.60).
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 08-18-2017, 10:07 AM
Steve West Steve West is offline
Par Delusionary
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Years Playing: 47.2
Courses Played: 460
Posts: 5,896
Niced 2,844 Times in 1,314 Posts
Default

[QUOTE=New013;3213427]Beyond that I think you're wanting more out of this than what was intended or what I ever made it out to be. It's just a list that gives you an idea of where things stand as of now and how they've changed since the original list. Any of the places in the Top 25 is a solid place to hit if you're traveling or wanting to live and have quality disc golf around you. A quick reference guide if you will.]

All true. I was just offering ideas for anyone who was curious or who might want to get more out of it, or take on some similar project.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 08-18-2017, 12:06 PM
Countchunkula's Avatar
Countchunkula Countchunkula is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago Burbs
Years Playing: 15.1
Courses Played: 175
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 1,485
Niced 565 Times in 263 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by New013 View Post
Orland park, it gets autocorrected.

It's on the map about 15 miles SW of chicagos dot

Just giving you crap, I knew you had to be talking about Orland. If it was only once, I would have ignored it, but I saw Orlando Park so many times in your post.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 08-18-2017, 01:04 PM
str8 str8 is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: FM, Tx
Years Playing: 10
Courses Played: 39
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 49
Niced 29 Times in 14 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bhadella View Post
The TX fluffing is real. Thankfully there was and In and Out so I was able to get a mighty fine burger in TX.

Bear Creek that I played on Wednesday in DFW (3.62 rated) isn't in the ballpark of courses lower rated in the Charlotte area (Sugaw at 3.24, Goat Island at 3.29, Rankin 3.42, Eastway 3.47, Kilborne 3.53, Reedy Creek 3.55, Stumpy Creek 3.58 and Winget 3.60).
I don't get the In-N-Out Burger love, to me it's just an average backyard grilled burger. No worries, that's why we have all the choices for burgers.

Bear Creek isn't my favorite in the area, it's lost some of it's spirit since the city starting making changes in preparation to convert over 1/3 of it to a dog park. I would have suggested Turner Park for something near DFW airport.

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 08-18-2017, 01:12 PM
bhadella bhadella is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charlotte, NC
Years Playing: 23
Courses Played: 171
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 3,168
Niced 159 Times in 104 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by str8 View Post
I don't get the In-N-Out Burger love, to me it's just an average backyard grilled burger. No worries, that's why we have all the choices for burgers.

Bear Creek isn't my favorite in the area, it's lost some of it's spirit since the city starting making changes in preparation to convert over 1/3 of it to a dog park. I would have suggested Turner Park for something near DFW airport.
I'm shocked by how big that dog park is going to be. Seems like they could have done something with a portion of land where hole 14 is for a dog park. I'll definitely try Turner the next time I am in town. I thought Bicentennial (the only other TX course I've played) was much closer to 3.5 then Bear Creek.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 08-18-2017, 10:18 PM
BrotherDave's Avatar
BrotherDave BrotherDave is offline
Crushing on Zoe and Hating on Keegan
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Millwall
Years Playing: 14
Courses Played: 187
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 15,471
Niced 2,780 Times in 1,281 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherBill View Post
I was with you until the Whataburger comment...

I said the same thing on the original thread - DFW players way overrate these courses. Heck I played a 2.5-star that had stray dogs and used needles all over and people hooking up with prostitutes in the parking lot.
Had nice teepads tho...
Hookers and nice tee pads, that's at least a 3 star in my book.

Were the dogs cute and fluffy? That's another .5 if yes.
Reply With Quote
 

  #70  
Old 08-18-2017, 11:40 PM
New013's Avatar
New013 New013 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Raleigh, NC
Years Playing: 11
Courses Played: 176
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 7,154
Niced 167 Times in 86 Posts
Send a message via AIM to New013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bhadella View Post
The TX fluffing is real. Thankfully there was and In and Out so I was able to get a mighty fine burger in TX.

Bear Creek that I played on Wednesday in DFW (3.62 rated) isn't in the ballpark of courses lower rated in the Charlotte area (Sugaw at 3.24, Goat Island at 3.29, Rankin 3.42, Eastway 3.47, Kilborne 3.53, Reedy Creek 3.55, Stumpy Creek 3.58 and Winget 3.60).
You must be mistaken, Charlotte is only at the top of this list because I intentionally crafted it so NC would look good.
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
What did you get for the holidays (2017 edition)? GoobyPls General Disc Golf Chat 61 01-01-2018 08:23 PM
The bag of Ian (2017 Edition) ian. Bag Suggestions & Feedback 2 04-06-2017 04:48 PM
The 2017 Ozark Mountain Open - PDGA B Tier - April 8/9, 2017 allenhoop Tournaments & Leagues 5 02-27-2017 04:24 PM
Best DG in the country. New013 General Disc Golf Chat 255 08-05-2014 12:38 PM
DG on Wine Country MotoDj General Disc Golf Chat 11 12-21-2009 09:08 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.