Bradimous1
Bogey Member
Couldn't you do 2 separate, 1 with tourneys only and the other for league play (or you could add your tourney scoring in the league play one also). That would seem to give you what you are looking for.
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
Ratings School...
- Thread starter brutalbrutus
- Start date
Couldn't you do 2 separate, 1 with tourneys only and the other for league play (or you could add your tourney scoring in the league play one also). That would seem to give you what you are looking for.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
As written above, separating league and tournament ratings is gonna hurt league play. One option that comes to mind is the generation of a constant that allows balancing between tournament and league play. It seems that there is enough variation, course to course, event to event that you couldn't apply this to all ratings, but a simple engine would allow players to balance their scores based on overall play, and their own.
Call it Cp or the pressure constant. An adjustment for differences in play due to pressure. While it isn't going to be hugely accurate, it would allow players to see, in a general way, whether the difference in their rating between the two events is due to relaxed play of if they really had a superior round.
Chuck, one thing I expected to see, and don't think I did, is that pros perform less well in league. Presumably, pros develop tools that help them deal with stress in tournament play. In league, the extra focus needed to employ those skills might be set aside making for higher scores. In other words, more relaxed conditions for ams means better play, for pros it makes for worse play.
Call it Cp or the pressure constant. An adjustment for differences in play due to pressure. While it isn't going to be hugely accurate, it would allow players to see, in a general way, whether the difference in their rating between the two events is due to relaxed play of if they really had a superior round.
Chuck, one thing I expected to see, and don't think I did, is that pros perform less well in league. Presumably, pros develop tools that help them deal with stress in tournament play. In league, the extra focus needed to employ those skills might be set aside making for higher scores. In other words, more relaxed conditions for ams means better play, for pros it makes for worse play.
Improbably
Eagle Member
I agree unless it's part of a move to make PDGA leagues "free" for players that have already paid for a membership. In that case I could see it adding value to a membership and possibly increasing the number of leagues.
But I'm not holding my breath waiting for the PDGA to add value to a membership . . .
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
If league ratings are broken out from tournament ratings, I believe we may still have a composite rating that is used to determine tournament divisions. So players would get the benefit of an overall rating even if they just played mostly or all league rounds. The main driving force is more for top pros who are concerned that league ratings are bringing down their composite rating.
krupicka
Double Eagle Member
How many top pros actually play in sanctioned leagues?
filobedo
Double Eagle Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2008
- Messages
- 1,205
Exactly! We have local players that refuse to play leagues locally because it hurts there rating unless they have the round of their life.
Summary of recent posts:
(1) People don't play leagues because of the ratings.
(2) If we take ratings out of leagues, people won't play.
I think we've reached the point that you can't please everyone.
(1) People don't play leagues because of the ratings.
(2) If we take ratings out of leagues, people won't play.
I think we've reached the point that you can't please everyone.
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
The players from 950 to 999 have been concerned about league ratings because many are trying to get their rating to 1000 since it seems that's one of the criteria some or many sponsors use to determine sponsorship. Similar to why some players will avoid courses they do not play well to not pull down their rating.
I've been trying to do the same, as the PDGA documents my decline.
I finally thwarted them by staying injured enough that there are no more rounds to be rated. Take that.
I finally thwarted them by staying injured enough that there are no more rounds to be rated. Take that.
As most pros should, IMO. Ratings were designed first and foremost to provide an objective means of categorizing players for divisional play. I imagine most pros couldn't care less about where they fit divisionally (I know I don't) because there's only one that they want to play (assuming they're under 40, anyway). Their rating doesn't really do a lot for them in that sense. A neat stat, but that's about it.
The thing that always amuses me when the topic of ratings and their "accuracy" come up is that it always seems people are quibbling over a few points. Their round was rated 956 when they're dead sure it should be a 962 or something like that. Or their average drops 3 points in the last update and it's the end of the world by the way they cry about it. Insignificant amounts that are utterly meaningless overall. 3 points, 6 points, 9 points, it's all less than a single throw on just about any course. So there really is no functional difference between being rated 921 or 912. You are an "intermediate" level player either way and still have to shoot the lowest score to win.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
You are raising the all to real notion that accuracy is subjective. Ratings are essentially a measure of a moving skill set. The idea that a player is rated 950 is simply inacurate. Players, even in a single event, aren't at a fixed rating. Even on a given hole their play might vary from 900 to 1000. A rating is simply an average of a bunch of individual actions and can only be so accurate. After that, arguments over minor differences are based on a players subjective view of "where their rating should be."
