#151  
Old 03-01-2019, 12:39 PM
sjberry2017's Avatar
sjberry2017 sjberry2017 is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Tennessee
Years Playing: 6.4
Courses Played: 51
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 1,258
Niced 215 Times in 142 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flick Maniac View Post
Excellent point. The stats keeper could record this properly, and if in doubt, ask the player "were you going for it?"
The one issue I see with that is a pro missing a run and saying “yeah that was a layup” when in reality it was a miss
Sponsored Links

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 03-01-2019, 12:59 PM
JC17393 JC17393 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Years Playing: 21.8
Courses Played: 150
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 7,766
Niced 3,612 Times in 1,504 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gcr_russell View Post
The Memorial always produces weird ratings. 1100 rounds. FPO getting higher ratings for the same scores on a course layout that plays easier.
Ratings have NOTHING to do with the course.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 03-01-2019, 01:16 PM
gcr_russell's Avatar
gcr_russell gcr_russell is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Lake Havasu City, AZ
Years Playing: 11.4
Courses Played: 42
Posts: 3,197
Niced 67 Times in 25 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC17393 View Post
Ratings have NOTHING to do with the course.
Correct. I understand how it works, but it's still silly that if a rating is a baseline of how someone is performing than a player can perform better than someone else and still receive a lower rating because the propagators are different.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 03-01-2019, 01:21 PM
jeverett's Avatar
jeverett jeverett is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Eugene, OR
Years Playing: 10.4
Courses Played: 27
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 1,199
Niced 45 Times in 30 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC17393 View Post
Ratings have NOTHING to do with the course.
That's not really true, though? If you look at the PDGA rating system, it uses a generalized linear formula to compute a points-per-throw slope (based on rating) for the scoring spread of the field, based entirely on the determined SSA for the round. In general, this expected slope is fairly reasonable for most fields/layouts, however it's absolutely possible for this to skew the ratings. Basically, if the particular course/layout doesn't spread out the scores of the field as much as its SSA->points-per-throw slope says it should, ratings are going to be skewed lower (or higher, in the case of rounds worse than the SSA) than they 'should' be the farther your round score was from the SSA. If the particular course/layout spreads out the scores of the field more than its SSA->points-per-throw slope says it should, ratings are going to be skewed higher (or lower, in the case of rounds worse than the SSA) than they should be the farther your round score was from the SSA.

Niced: (2)

Last edited by jeverett; 03-01-2019 at 01:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 03-01-2019, 01:21 PM
Cgkdisc's Avatar
Cgkdisc Cgkdisc is offline
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Years Playing: 30.6
Courses Played: 692
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 12,204
Niced 1,554 Times in 708 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gcr_russell View Post
The Memorial always produces weird ratings. 1100 rounds. FPO getting higher ratings for the same scores on a course layout that plays easier.
Shorter does not always mean easier, especially with lots of OB potential. The women also played in colder temps with more clothing layer changes over the round.

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 03-01-2019, 01:31 PM
2naphish's Avatar
2naphish 2naphish is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Land Of Cotton
Years Playing: 38.3
Courses Played: 26
Throwing Style: RHFH
Posts: 234
Niced 180 Times in 87 Posts
Default

R1 fpo footage is up.

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 03-01-2019, 01:46 PM
JC17393 JC17393 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Years Playing: 21.8
Courses Played: 150
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 7,766
Niced 3,612 Times in 1,504 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeverett View Post
That's not really true, though? If you look at the PDGA rating system, it uses a generalized linear formula to compute a points-per-throw slope (based on rating) for the scoring spread of the field, based entirely on the determined SSA for the round. In general, this expected slope is fairly reasonable for most fields/layouts, however it's absolutely possible for this to skew the ratings. Basically, if the particular course/layout doesn't spread out the scores of the field as much as its SSA->points-per-throw slope says it should, ratings are going to be skewed lower (or higher, in the case of rounds worse than the SSA) than they 'should' be the farther your round score was from the SSA. If the particular course/layout spreads out the scores of the field more than its SSA->points-per-throw slope says it should, ratings are going to be skewed higher (or lower, in the case of rounds worse than the SSA) than they should be the farther your round score was from the SSA.
Bottom line is the course itself is irrelevant to the math. The formulas don't know or account for the fact that MPO and FPO are playing mostly the same course except for a few tees/baskets. So judging the veracity of FPO ratings from yesterday against the MPO ratings yesterday is the same as judging the veracity of ratings for a round at Maple Hill Gold against the ratings for a round at Morley Field. Ratings aren't for comparing courses, they're for comparing players.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 03-01-2019, 02:02 PM
jeverett's Avatar
jeverett jeverett is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Eugene, OR
Years Playing: 10.4
Courses Played: 27
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 1,199
Niced 45 Times in 30 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC17393 View Post
Bottom line is the course itself is irrelevant to the math. The formulas don't know or account for the fact that MPO and FPO are playing mostly the same course except for a few tees/baskets. So judging the veracity of FPO ratings from yesterday against the MPO ratings yesterday is the same as judging the veracity of ratings for a round at Maple Hill Gold against the ratings for a round at Morley Field. Ratings aren't for comparing courses, they're for comparing players.
In terms of divisions and specific players, you're absolutely correct. It's also extremely difficult to use ratings alone to compare courses, true. But again, the design of a course *can* impact the accuracy (and potential for skew) of the round ratings it produces. A course or layout that spreads out or constricts the spread of scores considerably more than a course or layout of that particular SSA 'should' will affect the round ratings of anyone who's round score is significantly above or below the computed SSA. For most events and layouts, this isn't a big issue, however it certainly can be for some layouts, and the Memorial appears to have a history of this particular issue. Here's a chart I found from a number of years ago of a Memorial round exhibiting this particular issue:

Memorial R1 PDGA vs Obs.png

It's a little hard to interpret that chart, but basically what it's showing is that the farther away from 'scratch' a player's round score was, the greater the skew to their round rating, when comparing the observed points-per-throw slope with the actual PDGA points-per-throw slope that was applied, based on the determined SSA for that round.

Edit: as a specific example from that chart, a round score of 53 for that round came out at a ~1030 rating, however the observed slope of the spread of scores for that round suggested that it should have only rated a ~1025.

Niced: (1)

Last edited by jeverett; 03-01-2019 at 02:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 03-01-2019, 02:28 PM
Flick Maniac's Avatar
Flick Maniac Flick Maniac is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Jokela, Southern Finland
Posts: 1,789
Niced 676 Times in 368 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2naphish View Post
R1 fpo footage is up.
"aaaand next up, we have a blank screen"
-Uh, eh eh

Stopped watching right there and then.
Reply With Quote
 

  #160  
Old 03-01-2019, 02:29 PM
runningoz's Avatar
runningoz runningoz is offline
Bogey Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Courses Played: 87
Posts: 58
Niced 28 Times in 14 Posts
Default

Tried watching the FPO next day video....yaaa...no.... Going to take a hard pass on the next day coverage if that's what they are going to throw out.
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
DGPT: 2019 Idlewild Open brutalbrutus Tournaments & Leagues 255 07-31-2019 08:58 PM
DGPT Drops New Media Outlook for 2019 hellbound General Disc Golf Chat 440 02-13-2019 05:42 AM
2018 DGPT Tour Championship Oct 18-21 brutalbrutus Tournaments & Leagues 217 11-02-2018 04:21 PM
2017 DGPT Tour Championship brutalbrutus Tournaments & Leagues 192 11-02-2017 01:46 PM
DGPT: 2017 Pro Tour Championship DGPT General Disc Golf Chat 8 12-11-2016 10:16 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:29 AM.


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