PDGA Discussion Board - View Single Post

cgkdisc · May 16 2012, 02:45 PM

John, I've probably made 1000 posts here and elsewhere specifically answering ratings questions for members and providing calculation information including precision. But the reality is Roger and my direct customer is the PDGA Staff and Board. They determine the amount of ratings information they wish to publish.

The elected Board represents the members. They have seen much more detailed analysis at various times when requested over the past 12 years on how the ratings system works, reliability, accuracy, etc. Those meetings have even been open to members. They seem to be satisfied with the choices made for how the system is implemented and how it's presented.

Consider that the ratings are simply the transformation of a player's scores. They aren't some mystical judgment of a player's performance. The only numbers used in the calculation to produce SSA and round ratings are the scores and current ratings of propagators. There are no subjective elements in there. A score of 50 on a course getting a 50 SSA has remained at 1000 rating since the beginning.

The 95% error range is directly affected by how many props shoot scores on a layout, not how good the ratings are of the props. For a course around 50 SSA, the 95% range for 5 props is +/- 2.7 in SSA which is 5.3% potential error. For 60 props, the 95% range is +/- 0.8 or 1.5% error. Those are the ranges for playing the same course under the same conditions which is never exactly the same even going from morning to afternoon with no wind either round.

May 16 2012, 02:45 PM	#3134
cgkdisc PDGA Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota Posts: 6,235	John, I've probably made 1000 posts here and elsewhere specifically answering ratings questions for members and providing calculation information including precision. But the reality is Roger and my direct customer is the PDGA Staff and Board. They determine the amount of ratings information they wish to publish. The elected Board represents the members. They have seen much more detailed analysis at various times when requested over the past 12 years on how the ratings system works, reliability, accuracy, etc. Those meetings have even been open to members. They seem to be satisfied with the choices made for how the system is implemented and how it's presented. Consider that the ratings are simply the transformation of a player's scores. They aren't some mystical judgment of a player's performance. The only numbers used in the calculation to produce SSA and round ratings are the scores and current ratings of propagators. There are no subjective elements in there. A score of 50 on a course getting a 50 SSA has remained at 1000 rating since the beginning. The 95% error range is directly affected by how many props shoot scores on a layout, not how good the ratings are of the props. For a course around 50 SSA, the 95% range for 5 props is +/- 2.7 in SSA which is 5.3% potential error. For 60 props, the 95% range is +/- 0.8 or 1.5% error. Those are the ranges for playing the same course under the same conditions which is never exactly the same even going from morning to afternoon with no wind either round. __________________ Rater of the tossed arc.